Get out of there. Unwinnable. Enough American blood shed. Where is the necessary discussion? Where is Congress? No one wants the responsibility, so no more war. A draft needs to be reintroduced to involve the entire nation. When all our children are at risk, the willingness to employ will be better evaluated. (The entire focus of the republicans is cutting healthcare, safety net programs, and saving taxes for the upper percent, unconscionable.)
Over a hundred years ago, Rudyard Kipling wrote in the poem, The Young British Soldier, about British troops fighting in Afghanistan. The relevant lines say:
When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, And the women come out to cut up what remains, Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains An' go to your Gawd like a soldier. Go, go, go like a soldier, Go, go, go like a soldier, Go, go, go like a soldier, So-oldier of the Queen!
When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, And the women come out to cut up what remains, Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains An' go to your Gawd like a soldier. Go, go, go like a soldier, Go, go, go like a soldier, Go, go, go like a soldier, So-oldier of the Queen!
1
As always these days the NYT is not interested in doing what it USED to do, inform us so that we the reader can decide things for ourselves. No we get more of the same tiresome hyper partisan propaganda rhetoric whose aim is more mud throwing to help remove Trump from the job of POTUS by any means possible.
Since the day Hillary, the 'perfect candidate' whose turn it was, failed, the NYT has been on the war path to impeach. Everyday the front page is Trump, Putin and the Russians and dead Joe McCarthy must wonder if he was not actually a Democrat.
This war stinks and the NYT could have been honest enough to admit that but today's NYT thinks Obama was not warlike enough (he did not do as Hillary stupidly suggested in Syria, 'Jump in with both boots on') and supports the Cold War at all costs approach, with increased nation destruction, migrants, refugees and hell as the result. The NYT just wants to pin this ALL on Trump; a man I despise and wish was not POTUS (Sanders was my man but according to some Hillary supporters my 'treason' for not supporting her corrupt expensive campaign makes me 'as bad as ISIS, Trump and Putin'.
The NYT pretends here that IT wants peace while Trump is the warmonger, when the reality is the exact opposite. It was only weeks ago this very paper called Trump, 'presidential' for his stupid missile attack in Syria and the MOAB dropped uselessly in Afghanistan. The NYT pushes the McCain = Clinton, RNC = DNC = Eternal War Pentagon policies! Enough!
Since the day Hillary, the 'perfect candidate' whose turn it was, failed, the NYT has been on the war path to impeach. Everyday the front page is Trump, Putin and the Russians and dead Joe McCarthy must wonder if he was not actually a Democrat.
This war stinks and the NYT could have been honest enough to admit that but today's NYT thinks Obama was not warlike enough (he did not do as Hillary stupidly suggested in Syria, 'Jump in with both boots on') and supports the Cold War at all costs approach, with increased nation destruction, migrants, refugees and hell as the result. The NYT just wants to pin this ALL on Trump; a man I despise and wish was not POTUS (Sanders was my man but according to some Hillary supporters my 'treason' for not supporting her corrupt expensive campaign makes me 'as bad as ISIS, Trump and Putin'.
The NYT pretends here that IT wants peace while Trump is the warmonger, when the reality is the exact opposite. It was only weeks ago this very paper called Trump, 'presidential' for his stupid missile attack in Syria and the MOAB dropped uselessly in Afghanistan. The NYT pushes the McCain = Clinton, RNC = DNC = Eternal War Pentagon policies! Enough!
1
Trump still thinks he is in a reality show where all he has to do is show up and tell people they are fired after his children have their cameo appearance. The only policy he has is to nullify whatever Obama did. After that is over, he has nothing left for a focus. He has no ideas, no direction, and definitely no intention of learning how to govern. He likes the show but never reads the script.He is so very much worse than I ever imagined anyone to be.
But the GOP Congress is dancing in the aisles. If he won't act as a brake on their irresponsible behavior, they won't act as a brake on his. Now, that is a bargain made with the devil. It is the country that is going to hell for it. What will be left at the end of four years? A smoldering wreck like Granfell Hall in London that becoming the kiss of death for the leadership of Teresa May? Corbyn is their Sanders. Now, can we have Sanders in place of Trump?
But the GOP Congress is dancing in the aisles. If he won't act as a brake on their irresponsible behavior, they won't act as a brake on his. Now, that is a bargain made with the devil. It is the country that is going to hell for it. What will be left at the end of four years? A smoldering wreck like Granfell Hall in London that becoming the kiss of death for the leadership of Teresa May? Corbyn is their Sanders. Now, can we have Sanders in place of Trump?
4
If you just put a copy of his permanent bone spur exemption in place of the George Washington portrait behind POTUS45's tiny signing desk, it might clear up the confusion. Trump default: "How can I get all of the glory and none of the pain?"
It's not good to have decisions about war solely in the hands of a military man. However, it would be even worse to have those decisions in the hands of incompetent, illogical, inexperienced Trump. Has he made any good decisions about anything so far? He's even incompetent trying to hide what's going on with the investigations into his actions. He keeps blurting out stuff. Please, take away his power to make decisions that affect the welfare of our country.
Bombs are cheaper than competence. More profitable, too. Can't we (some of us) just get on with getting rich at everyone else's expense, and put away the righteousness costumes?
1
Trump has delegated all wars to general mattis - he will fire General Mattis before next election and claim that he drained the swamp as we know he will not take responsibility for any action except the one that he can brag about whether correctly or incorrectly.
He loves to take credit for things that he has nothing to do with and he also is very clever in denying all his short comings.
Afghanistan is one of those sad stories of human misery complicated by our incoherent policies very similar to Vietnam. Leaving it up to the MIC it is only going to get worst and we will not even know about it. The irony of this war is a lack of draft. Only volunteers mainly from the less fortunate families would suffer in Afghanistan and then as veterans of another forgotten war like so many others from Iraq, and yemen.
War is not the answer for Afghanistan or Yemen, or Syria. But our all powerful military feels they have the answer to fix world problems. Yes we can pulverize cities with inhabitants, yes we have the fire power to do just that but in the end we leave a barren landscape for others to fix.
With a large hammer every problem looks like a nail. And for Trump appearing Macho is better than appearing smart as he along with the military believes in Brawn instead of brain.
He loves to take credit for things that he has nothing to do with and he also is very clever in denying all his short comings.
Afghanistan is one of those sad stories of human misery complicated by our incoherent policies very similar to Vietnam. Leaving it up to the MIC it is only going to get worst and we will not even know about it. The irony of this war is a lack of draft. Only volunteers mainly from the less fortunate families would suffer in Afghanistan and then as veterans of another forgotten war like so many others from Iraq, and yemen.
War is not the answer for Afghanistan or Yemen, or Syria. But our all powerful military feels they have the answer to fix world problems. Yes we can pulverize cities with inhabitants, yes we have the fire power to do just that but in the end we leave a barren landscape for others to fix.
With a large hammer every problem looks like a nail. And for Trump appearing Macho is better than appearing smart as he along with the military believes in Brawn instead of brain.
2
I'm still waiting for the "secret plan". Since Trump "doesn't trust the generals" when and what are his better, more brilliant, militarily successful plans instead? When do we learn that the Trump plan for Afghanistan and ISIS?
Trump believes money solves any problem -- even if it's money spent in support of a bad strategy. Trump learned nothing from Vietnam; he sacrificed nothing. He is our drunk uncle, pontificating from his stool at the end of the bar. His supporters do not expect any deep thought from Trump, just knee-jerk reactions.
1
We can never "win" in Afghanistan. The simple fact is a large segment of the country WANTS to live in a theocracy under Taliban rule. Unless we kill or incarcerate a large majority of the military age males, which we are not willing to do, then it's like South Vietnam's relationship to communism in that the current government does not offer a better alternative than living under Taliban rule. The American mind cannot comprehend the tribalism and sectarianism over there.
1
there's nothing to win. and you can't expect a comprehensive debate and public discussion when upwards of 80% of Americans don't care what happens there.
I think this war is going to turn the Hundred Year War into a mere skirmish, by comparison. Thanx, George and especially, Cheney.
1
What our government needs to do now is admit failure, apologize to the Afghans, & go home.
Months before the election Trump told us that "sleeping around" Manhattan during the Sixties became his “personal Vietnam". Surviving the dating scene without contracting any venereal diseases made him feel "like a great and very brave soldier.” And he attended a military college prep high school. The wealth of knowledge garnered from both experiences equip him to end our Afghanistan War in triumph -- nothing less than final, tumultuous victory. So we should just relax and follow him into whatever blind alley he takes us.
Somebody please pass the Xanax.
Somebody please pass the Xanax.
1
Trump does have a "plan" for Afghanistan, just as he has a plan about everything else in his agenda. Talk big, pretend you're winning and when you lose, blame everyone else. Simple. And so far, effective (to his useful idiots).
1
You used two words that can never be used together in the same phrase, unless you are trying to create the world's worst oxymoron; "responsibility" and "trump".
Failures, mistakes, errors, miscalculations - these are NEVER trump's fault. Just ask him. They are always the fault of "unfair" "losers" and "haters" who envy the Donald's "genius", his "wealth", his incredibly potent "manhood", or some such rubbish.
Failures, mistakes, errors, miscalculations - these are NEVER trump's fault. Just ask him. They are always the fault of "unfair" "losers" and "haters" who envy the Donald's "genius", his "wealth", his incredibly potent "manhood", or some such rubbish.
Afghanistan is a small war. As long as the American President is not afraid to actually fight -
- and we just got one like that moved out of the White House -
- we can just keep chewing up all the jihadis from around the world who want to go to a war zone and jump ahead to the next life.
Actually letting our guys shoot when an enemy points a gun at them - which was too militaristic for poor Barack - we can keep losses way down.
There is a lot at stake in Af-stan for the terrorists of Wahabbism and there will always be war there if only because satan demands it. We can always move our people out and come back 5, 10, 20 years later.
- and we just got one like that moved out of the White House -
- we can just keep chewing up all the jihadis from around the world who want to go to a war zone and jump ahead to the next life.
Actually letting our guys shoot when an enemy points a gun at them - which was too militaristic for poor Barack - we can keep losses way down.
There is a lot at stake in Af-stan for the terrorists of Wahabbism and there will always be war there if only because satan demands it. We can always move our people out and come back 5, 10, 20 years later.
Obama said Afghanistan is the right war. He pulled out of Iraq & created ISIS.
You don't really want him to take charge!
Must be irony and I missed it.
Putting anyone else in charge and keeping Trump as far as possible away from the details is the only way to operate for the next years.
Perhaps encouraging him on this decision might persuade him to delegate all the rest of his responsibilities to responsible adults (or former fund raisers in the case of his ambassador to Canada).
Must be irony and I missed it.
Putting anyone else in charge and keeping Trump as far as possible away from the details is the only way to operate for the next years.
Perhaps encouraging him on this decision might persuade him to delegate all the rest of his responsibilities to responsible adults (or former fund raisers in the case of his ambassador to Canada).
The economy of Afghanistan has fallen dramatically with the pullout of over 100000 foreign troops since 2014, troops bringing foreign money to buy commodities and personal items, and the leaders of those troops allocating moneys to pay locals for their intel and bribes to local officials to grease the skids. The country, poor as it is, is a great training ground for various military scenarios, from house to house, to tanks in the desert, bombing runs, infiltrations, and so on. The best training is on the job training, where a fluid situation requires original thought and creative solutions to non-book problems. We could not invent a better place to play war games, and as many have pointed out, there is a benefit to our military-industrial complex, replacing arms and ammunitions, the tank and aircraft parts, the supply trucks, etc. That our government foots the bill is part and parcel of the economy, here and there. Political solution? We don't want one.
3
As much as I'd love to ridicule and defame Donald Trump, I don't think we're addressing the true problem here. He really doesn't have a strategy and that's disconcerting but there's a larger question. Why do we still have a blank check from Congress to expand or contract our involvement anywhere in the Middle East? You can't ship 15,000 troops to Afghanistan indefinitely without a budget. Perhaps we should call for a re-affirmation on war spending from our current Congress. I mean, the justification was last publicly addressed when Hillary Clinton was still a Senator. If you want the war, you should go on record voting for it. No vote, no purse. No purse, no war. It's that simple.
8
Enough. The US has no reliable partner in this hot mess. The government in Kabul is both corrupt and useless. ISIS is ascendant, the Taliban owns the countryside and the night. The Pakistanis are playing the US Defense Department and intelligence services while using the Taliban for their own proxy fights. After 16 years our continued presence accomplishes nothing. We have no border with Afghanistan. Let this be the neighborhood's problem now, without our soldiers to provide cover for every player's schemes. Declare victory and GO HOME NOW!
7
My idea for Afghanistan is to politely ask the Taliban to grant the Abadi Government Kabul and say a few miles of land on the outskirts. Thats it!
Taliban get all the rest of the country. Lets face it, Abadi is nothing more than the Mayor of Kabul now, he doesn't dare go out into the countryside.
Sooner or later the Taliban will take over the entire country anyway so might as well get something out of it.
There is British blood, Russian blood, and American blood all over this country.
why do we want to sacrifice more for such a lost cause.
Taliban get all the rest of the country. Lets face it, Abadi is nothing more than the Mayor of Kabul now, he doesn't dare go out into the countryside.
Sooner or later the Taliban will take over the entire country anyway so might as well get something out of it.
There is British blood, Russian blood, and American blood all over this country.
why do we want to sacrifice more for such a lost cause.
3
Chump is always passing the buck. He is an ill informed dolt who takes all the credit when things may go well and refuses to acknowledge his culpability when things don't go in the right direction. Frankly, I feel that his actions or lack thereof, show a cowardly sense to truly be our commander-in-chief. He is as they say, "all blow and no go"!
3
The president is much too busy tweeting and whining to be bothered with dirty little foreign wars that he and his sons will never have to fight and the hundreds of billions of dollars that shower fortunes onto arms merchants and contractors who probably vacation with him at Mar a Lago.
8
Thank goodness a Republican is President again. The NYT can once more take a strong anti war get out of Afghanistan position, which it was forced to abandon when Obama was in office for 8 years.
1
Oh, good, Jamie. We've now ducked the topic at hand and focused more comfortably on the position of The New York Times. But promise us, please, that, once we've solved the journalism issue, we can get back to deciding the military and political issues of the topic at hand.
Trump has given Defense Secretary Jim Mattis the authority to determine troop levels in Afghanistan.
But Trump told us he knows more than the generals!?#!
But Trump told us he knows more than the generals!?#!
10
Lockheed Martin and KBR would never have this war end. KBR hosed off our bloody gurneys in AFG, and Lockheed Martin has contractual control over my medical retirement income, presently. It's not going to end so long as America doesn't acknowledge the corporate interest to keep this war in perpetuity.--Ret Navy Nurse
3
Lassitude and condescension: General Washington, eat your heart out.
We are stupid. We will be blamed, rightly or wrongly, for killing more people over there and we will then be offended in the aftermath of the next "terror" incident here. We just don't get that history goes back a bit further thn what was said on Fox News last night.
2
You can delegate authority but you can't delegate responsibility.
5
Maybe Trump doesn't want to own this war because even he understands that it's unwinnable. This is an ideological war, an insurgency, Who in their right mind believes that a few thousand more troops will make a difference? Even if we kill everyone who's ever had a cup of coffee with the Taliban, is there someone who's going to ultimately say, "We surrender" and they all lay down their weapons? Did we learn nothing in Vietnam? If we were going to win hearts and minds, don't you think we'd have done so by now?
2
Whatever happened to Chump's secret plan to defeat ISIS,
I thought he knew more about the war than the generals.
I thought he knew more about the war than the generals.
5
You'd think Pumpkinhead could at least ask his bromantic partner, Vlad, his thoughts on Afghanistan. He must have some. Remember how smug we used to be about Afghanistan being Russia's Vietnam?
3
After the terrible consequences our soldiers have suffered in Viet Nam, Lebanon, and Iraq its seems inconceivable for an American president to risk further loss of military and civilian lives by spending untold more billions without any realistic hope for victory in Afghanistan. Mr. Trump needs to take responsibility for the Afghanistan war by arranging an early pullout of all American troops by a date certain, not later than the end of 2017.
3
This country hasn't won a war since WW11 so what does that say about this country. Wars a fabricated by the hawks and defense contractors, anybody that thinks this is for the benefit of the American people is living in Trumpland.
3
Americans are in the habit of freeing countries.
Bosnia, South Korea, Thailand, Burma, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and other places are FREE because of the Balkan intervention, Korean War and Vietnam. Then there's Grenada, Panama, and other places in Central America.
Sorry that your education process contained so much Leftist indoctrination. I'd consider asking for a refund.
Bosnia, South Korea, Thailand, Burma, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and other places are FREE because of the Balkan intervention, Korean War and Vietnam. Then there's Grenada, Panama, and other places in Central America.
Sorry that your education process contained so much Leftist indoctrination. I'd consider asking for a refund.
Actually, I think that we won the Gulf War, mainly because it was short and involved virtually nobody.
I wonder if Trump, who claims to know more than the generals, is aware that while American soldiers are fighting and dying in Afghanistan, Russia is
supplying weapons to the Taliban. In fact, Russia wants to undermine the Afghan government. Some Americans might have been killed with Russian-supplied weapons but this doesn't seem to bother our commander-in-chief, who pooh-poohs sanctions and maintains a cozy relationship with the thuggish Vladimir Putin.
supplying weapons to the Taliban. In fact, Russia wants to undermine the Afghan government. Some Americans might have been killed with Russian-supplied weapons but this doesn't seem to bother our commander-in-chief, who pooh-poohs sanctions and maintains a cozy relationship with the thuggish Vladimir Putin.
7
How many presidents can dance on the head of the Afghanistan War pin? Fighting this war may yet be included in the oath of office on Inaugaration Day.
5
It is painfully obvious that no one is in charge.
8
What is the point here? Plenty of bosses(Obama for one) act like a decision was theirs when they actually delegated. Others actually give credit to those who are really making the decisions. Obviously this newspaper loathes Trump and loves Obama but really this is just an issue of management style and optics.
2
The US is learning the hard way what the Hindus, the English and the Russians learnt before. You cannot conquer Afghanistan. A mountain range is called the Hindu Kush (killer of indians); Read Kipling and others about the English failures (when a single english soldier (a doctor I believe) was allowed to return down the khyber pass, after the entire english expeditionary force was killed to warn them nt to try again. Ask the Russians how they fared after 1979, and how the US are faring now. The objective of going to afghanistan was to get rid of Bin Laden, which Bush failed miserably, by making sure we failed in Iraq and created ISIS. Now Bin Laden is dead, our job is done. Talibans never hrmed the US, and we are not in charge of restoring democrcy in the whole world (or we should start with saudi arabia). Once Bin Laden was killed, mission accomplished, nice to have met you, I've got some urgent errands elsewhere, and fare ye well. We got out of vietnam, we should get out of afghanistan, and not waste more lives and money there. If anyting buy them TVs and broadcast sitcoms to pervert them (like we did to russia). That's the one thing the US do really well. Not war: the last war we won was the invasion of granada, under Reagan... GET OUT!
4
There once was a Commander-in-Chief
Whose time in charge has been less than brief
Who really opted out
Of then using his clout
By using his underling’s belief
Whose time in charge has been less than brief
Who really opted out
Of then using his clout
By using his underling’s belief
3
There will never be a plan. We have a president who is an idiot and a fool. He can't make a decision unless it lines his pocket, at others expense. Time to get out of these long wars. They are going nowhere.
7
So you would prefer an illiterate man-child with Alex Jones and Steve Bannon whispering in his ear running America's wars to James Mattis, because it's the more appropriate process?
2
I fully expect Trump to go deeper into the Nixon "playbook" and announce that he has a secret plan. He will say that when his plan can be revealed, it will be hailed as the greatest plan in U.S. presidential history. Then while he coasts, he will claim anything good that happens and place the blame when it's convenient.
4
As a citizen who has had enough of the Trump clan and its in-laws I am ready to take a huge impeachment shovel and dump them all out in the street where they can set up their card tables and hawk their wares on their own time instead of on the country's time. The longer we delay getting this bunch out of the Oval Office, the longer we are allowing self-serving parasites to sap the nation's strength and its citizens' democracy. Enough of Mr. Tweets and his floundering lack of intelligent leadership.
8
President tRump attended NY Military Academy, he knows what he's doing.
1
And he watches "the shows" (his words), so all the better. We can have complete confidence...
1
And he was its greatest graduate, with the highest GPA and the most honors ever, captain of every team including debate and gymnastics and voted most likely to run his father's company in the school yearbook.
1
Why not set a date that US will evacuate military - tell the world this date - tell the current Afghan "government" that this will be YOUR WAR - win it or loose it! Whoever wins - if the new Afghan nation becomes a threat to the US we will return and blow everything away again - then start all over!
Chaos is the nickname given to 3 star general Jim Mattis by the high ranking field officers under his command. The warrior’s warrior. It was NOT a compliment!
When he headed up CENTCOM (Iraq, Afghanistan, and Gulf Wars) before Obama relieved him of duty for being too aggressive he would be in a protection caravan to meet with local leaders in Iraq, STOP the caravan, grab an M279--light machine gun and get involved in firefights! He’d show up to meetings with blood spattered on his uniform. “A Marine is a Marine is a Marine” my brother-in-law explained when I asked him about the Marine officers who graduated with him at Annapolis.
Trump LOVES generals! He put a general officer in charge of Homeland Security-John F Kelly. HR McMaster, ANOTHER general is head of NSA replacing General Michael Flynn.
Mattis as SecDef is a problem being that the Secretary of Defense should be a civilian--e.g.Leon Panetta, Bob Gates but the GOP went along with Trump’s nomination and changed the rules to allow Mattis to take the job. The whole point of having civilians in these positions is a check on the Pentagon.
This “experiment” in all generals is going badly.
GENEVA — Airstrikes by the American-led coalition against ISIS targets have killed hundreds of civilians (~450) around Raqqa, the last Syrian stronghold, and left 160,000 people displaced acc to UN.
Mattis was let go for good reason. He LIKES war!
Addt’l troops? Marked inc of civilians dying as ISIS lives among civilians.
When he headed up CENTCOM (Iraq, Afghanistan, and Gulf Wars) before Obama relieved him of duty for being too aggressive he would be in a protection caravan to meet with local leaders in Iraq, STOP the caravan, grab an M279--light machine gun and get involved in firefights! He’d show up to meetings with blood spattered on his uniform. “A Marine is a Marine is a Marine” my brother-in-law explained when I asked him about the Marine officers who graduated with him at Annapolis.
Trump LOVES generals! He put a general officer in charge of Homeland Security-John F Kelly. HR McMaster, ANOTHER general is head of NSA replacing General Michael Flynn.
Mattis as SecDef is a problem being that the Secretary of Defense should be a civilian--e.g.Leon Panetta, Bob Gates but the GOP went along with Trump’s nomination and changed the rules to allow Mattis to take the job. The whole point of having civilians in these positions is a check on the Pentagon.
This “experiment” in all generals is going badly.
GENEVA — Airstrikes by the American-led coalition against ISIS targets have killed hundreds of civilians (~450) around Raqqa, the last Syrian stronghold, and left 160,000 people displaced acc to UN.
Mattis was let go for good reason. He LIKES war!
Addt’l troops? Marked inc of civilians dying as ISIS lives among civilians.
5
A war that he's delegated to generals. He's the disinterested commander in chief. The man without responsibility, so obsessed with the presidency of Barack Obama he will dismantle every element. The jealousy is palpable.
More time for whining about being investigated, visiting his properties while dragging along an entourage & secret service staff who will spend money there, enriching himself.
Eventually tax payer millions will be spent fortifying his properties. Just like that helicopter pad was added at Mar-a-lago. We probably won't know the extent of it. But we somehow know corruption and self-dealing is involved.
More time for whining about being investigated, visiting his properties while dragging along an entourage & secret service staff who will spend money there, enriching himself.
Eventually tax payer millions will be spent fortifying his properties. Just like that helicopter pad was added at Mar-a-lago. We probably won't know the extent of it. But we somehow know corruption and self-dealing is involved.
5
The Trump Administration is going to be an amazing combination of the corruption and self dealing of the Harding Administration and the criminality of the Nixon Administration. It will probably have nuclear war and treason with Russia added in as well. Trump has said that he doesn't understand why we don't use nuclear weapons first. North Korea is probably where he'll try out the nuclear options.
1
how many people need to die, how many billions need to be spent for trump to realize Obama was right to get out, just like Obama is right about healthcare.
5
Neat and clean! If things go well, it was Trump who made the call. If things go poorly we have Mattis to hang. Got it!
1
How would he make policy? The closest he has to military training was when he was a boy sent to VFMA because he was an incorrigible delinquent rich kid. He dodged the draft and has no clue.
The school is in my region. It is the go to place for people with enough money to send kids they cannot stand to be around, in addition to being an actual "military" styled school.
Afghanistan is yet another reason that anyone who knew anything before the (stolen) selection said he was completely unfit for the job. He does not know anything but worse has no ability or desire to learn. He is an old man who wants people to fawn over him while he lies about his golf score, not work hard on difficult issues he has no idea about.
The school is in my region. It is the go to place for people with enough money to send kids they cannot stand to be around, in addition to being an actual "military" styled school.
Afghanistan is yet another reason that anyone who knew anything before the (stolen) selection said he was completely unfit for the job. He does not know anything but worse has no ability or desire to learn. He is an old man who wants people to fawn over him while he lies about his golf score, not work hard on difficult issues he has no idea about.
3
I am an old person, too, and I would be pretty happy with a guaranteed income, and no real worries.
2
What Mattis should do now, since he has been give the OK to increase troop levels, is to not stop at 5 thousand. Why not 50 thousand? Or a Johnsonian 500 thousand? That would get our attention and maybe convince us to get out of this deplorable misadventure.
Bring back the draft!
Bring back the draft!
4
500,000 troops would be too many. We'd end up killing every living thing in Afghanistan, and then it would be over. The self-sustaining nature of the conflict in non-nuclear Afghanistan is as close to perfect as we can get - only 15,000 troops, and a steady stream of $32 billion a month to the military industrial complex. How is that not winning?
No Trump children for Congressional children will drafted.
1
It does my heart a lot of good to see that my prediction was correct.
Any N Y Times editorial articles about the gun-toting, violence-prone, knuckle-dragging Democrat who shot up the baseball field, are gone even before the end of the week that the event happened.
I guess the self-examination phase has ended.
3
You seem to suggest that because a "knuckle-dragging Democrat" shot up a baseball field of Republicans at practice, the NYT should give Trump a pass on his totally incoherent foreign policy. In the words of Mr. 45, "Sad!!!".
Perhaps you missed the many column inches dedicated to the shooting- in, of all places, the NYT, and every "liberal" news outlet (online, print, radio, and televised) I read. And yet, here you are, pointing a finger- all the while forgetting the other three that point back at you. Can you just stop, and reflect on the point of this column, rather than deflecting to a completely unrelated issue, one, I might add, that you yourself fabricated in defense of your party?
Perhaps you missed the many column inches dedicated to the shooting- in, of all places, the NYT, and every "liberal" news outlet (online, print, radio, and televised) I read. And yet, here you are, pointing a finger- all the while forgetting the other three that point back at you. Can you just stop, and reflect on the point of this column, rather than deflecting to a completely unrelated issue, one, I might add, that you yourself fabricated in defense of your party?
1
Complaints about nobody discussing the "radicalization of extremist democrats" was being screamed about on AM radio simultaneously while NPR analyzed the same event. Just because you chose not to hear it or read about it doesn't mean it didn't happen. We are all very concerned about the DNC Hit Squads, Bernie Bombers, League of Liberal Assassins, and Al Franken in America. It turned out though, that Scalise wasn't the tip of any particular spear except his own. His head needed examining, nobody else's.
Trump has shown time after time that he has no knowledge of our history, nor does he seemtions m to care. He need only look (maybe e he can watch the TV version) at the Vietnam war. The buildup of troops in 1965-66 lead to a bigger and deeper hole from which we never escaped. Of course, Johnson was lied to, thus the increase. But Trump has not been lied to (He is the liar in chief), he just doesn't know or care that our never ending wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were build on lies of the GW Bush administration. Yet his signature on proclamations gets bigger with each signing and as his nose expands.
1
"Of course, Johnson was lied to, thus the increase."
Stop making excuses for LBJ's disastrous policies.
I know there is a drive to rehab him but he screwed up big time and then essentially quit after he sent about 500k troops to South Vietnam.
There's a special place for him...
Stop making excuses for LBJ's disastrous policies.
I know there is a drive to rehab him but he screwed up big time and then essentially quit after he sent about 500k troops to South Vietnam.
There's a special place for him...
T (andhe lowest common denominator in every one of these petulant, infantile decisions by Trump is that they seek to overturn - to nullify - everything related to President Obama. Trump has abdicated his Constitutional obligations to serve as Commander in Chief - indeed, he is wholly undeserving of that title, as is equally the case for his title as "POTUS." Trump has never once accepted responsibility for anything he has done, although he is quick to claim "success" for the accomplishments (not to mention tax deductions) rightfully owed to others. His fatuous braggadocio notwithstanding, Trump knows zero about the military, zero about Afghanistan, zero about international terrorism, and zero about diplomacy - but rest assured that he intends to fob off the inevitable failure of this latest ill-advised "surge" in Afghanistan. Decades of international incursions there have failed - we, as always, never manage to learn the lessons of history. Once again: the past is prologue, and we will send thousands more of our blood and treasure off to this hellhole for a non-existent mission of "winning." We would be better served declaring victory, rescuing all Afghans who wish to leave there, and decamping promptly. 6/16, 9:20 AM
3
Forget about it. Trump has no interest in dealing with This hornets nest.
1
"What's the strategy" has been the unanswered question in both Iraq and Afghanistan since the beginning.
3
President Trump commands nothing except, perhaps, for his Twitter feed. He abuses things with his tweets or his negligence but he's not in command. To be in command, a leader has to know something and be willing to learn. The President's willingness in this regard is well reflected by his "Backward, Christian soldier" march to regression on health care, immigration, global alliances and rapprochement with Cuba.
Unfortunately, we can hardly afford the President's delusionally destructive forays into a past that never was.
Unfortunately, we can hardly afford the President's delusionally destructive forays into a past that never was.
4
Empires rise on the basis of wars.
Our perpetual war machine chugging alone.
However , wars needs to be won.
Afghanistan is dragging along.
no war this long is sustainable, what ever the military industrial complex thinks, they already aware of that at one location war shouldn't be long.
Other wise it decays and degenerates serious life and money grinding machine.
I am not pro-war person at all, but this is the logic of pro-war group.
they are extremely aware of they are running out of time, AFGHANISTAN
entanglement must end and must end soon. or
face up the fierce domestic protest against federal government.
Lets' accept , US tax payers spending allocation of Afghanistan war ha s long been consumed, it is running dry.
Our perpetual war machine chugging alone.
However , wars needs to be won.
Afghanistan is dragging along.
no war this long is sustainable, what ever the military industrial complex thinks, they already aware of that at one location war shouldn't be long.
Other wise it decays and degenerates serious life and money grinding machine.
I am not pro-war person at all, but this is the logic of pro-war group.
they are extremely aware of they are running out of time, AFGHANISTAN
entanglement must end and must end soon. or
face up the fierce domestic protest against federal government.
Lets' accept , US tax payers spending allocation of Afghanistan war ha s long been consumed, it is running dry.
1
Leaders must figure a military strategy that slyly removes as many of our weapons as we can, protects as many Afghan soldiers and citizens who really risked all by putting in with us as we can, and leave. That's the best way. On the down side, Trump will say we--I mean HE--won the war.
1. Thousands of lives understates matters. Several thousands of lives is more appropriate. And its likely the count on cicilians is understated, being over 26K in 2014.
2. Make no mistake about it, Trump believed he could delegate most of his responsibilities and then focus on his Adoration Tours. Not having a decent grasp on how the US govt runs, and specifically the executive responsibilities, he believed he could simply hand off weighty matters to those "best and brightest" he appointed, or as we see now not appointed to keep things lean, and by some miracle the nation would leap into "great again" land.
2. Lets not forget the radical Right and how it profits off this war and our other undesirable adventures overseas. The Koch Bros, and the libertarian agenda of James McGill Buchanan, that the very wealthy have been pushing behind the scenes for decades now. (Which Pence has adopted...)
4. Until more Americans start to truly care about what we do in foreign lands, economically, militarily or both, not much is going to change in regards to these wasted efforts at nation building, or trying to eradicate Jihadism. And right now the US industrial-military-intelligence complex has no reason to get out the business of war. Whats pushing them to end any of the conflicts we find ourselves involved in? Certainly not the WH, congress has been looking the other way for the most part, and the citizenry (most of whom have not been touched by it) are doing nothing.
2. Make no mistake about it, Trump believed he could delegate most of his responsibilities and then focus on his Adoration Tours. Not having a decent grasp on how the US govt runs, and specifically the executive responsibilities, he believed he could simply hand off weighty matters to those "best and brightest" he appointed, or as we see now not appointed to keep things lean, and by some miracle the nation would leap into "great again" land.
2. Lets not forget the radical Right and how it profits off this war and our other undesirable adventures overseas. The Koch Bros, and the libertarian agenda of James McGill Buchanan, that the very wealthy have been pushing behind the scenes for decades now. (Which Pence has adopted...)
4. Until more Americans start to truly care about what we do in foreign lands, economically, militarily or both, not much is going to change in regards to these wasted efforts at nation building, or trying to eradicate Jihadism. And right now the US industrial-military-intelligence complex has no reason to get out the business of war. Whats pushing them to end any of the conflicts we find ourselves involved in? Certainly not the WH, congress has been looking the other way for the most part, and the citizenry (most of whom have not been touched by it) are doing nothing.
1
Trump has more Midwestern Victory Tours scheduled; he's starting again.
Sorry, remind me what this war is about, again?
Is it me, or is it pretty disgraceful that we are supposedly at war and our government never, ever articulates what our goals are, or even what our reasons for being at war are in the first place? Is it just war for the sheer fun of being at war, and we don't even need a reason?
Is it me, or is it pretty disgraceful that we are supposedly at war and our government never, ever articulates what our goals are, or even what our reasons for being at war are in the first place? Is it just war for the sheer fun of being at war, and we don't even need a reason?
3
After 9-11, there were apparently indications from the Taliban that we could have gone into Afghanistan and killed the people who had attacked us without opposition. The Taliban come from a culture that understands revenge. Instead we invade, think we are over throwing the Taliban to establish "democracy", and start a war in which we are still engaged. That there is a single American fighting in Afghanistan is a tribute to the cultural ignorance and just plain stupidity of our leadership--everybody involved from GWB to the present. Why can't people grasp the fact that there areas of the world that are ungovernable by our definition of government. Afghanistan is the worst, but is there any government in that part of the world, other than Israel and maybe Turkey on a good day, that represents the interests of its people? My personal belief is that it is at least in part genetic. We need to bug out tomorrow and leave those people to their own devices. A network of war lords controlling swatches of territory and the systemic abuse of women is probably the outcome regardless of our efforts. Accept reality.
1
Eliot Cohen in Supreme Command, a book designed to defend the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, urged Presidents to micromanage. He argued that only the President has the broad political perspective to decide what the military ought to do in any war.
1
Why not ask the Russians for advice? They're right next door and have had plenty of fairly recent experience. There's even a couple of neat war movies about their exploits. And their overwhelming success is still a legend ... oh, wait...
As long as the United States supplies the soldiers and does most of the fighting, the Afghans will never take over. They have become dependent on us to carry the load of protecting them. It's high time they take responsibility or suffer the consequences.
Yes, esteemed Editorial Board, the Afghanistan conflict is now President Trump's conflict...
But you inadequately present that it was a) Barack Obama who stated unequivocally that the Afghanistan conflict as the one that we had to win, and b) that Obama himself was responsible through his prior announcement and withdrawal of troops for the state of the conflict today.
Obama's inability to see things through to resolution has created a world that is far less safe than it was when he took office, and the position of the United States as a world leader has suffered as a result of his meandering policies.
Obama, perhaps because he was not a party to is formulation, did not understand the Powell Doctrine...if you decide to fight, fight to win.
The handcuffs on the military responses in Afghanistan, and elsewhere too, were Obama's handiwork.
And if the mistakes that he made are to be corrected, it is axiomatic that the necessary corrections be implemented.
You can't have it both ways, ladies and gentlemen, that's not the way the real world works.
But you inadequately present that it was a) Barack Obama who stated unequivocally that the Afghanistan conflict as the one that we had to win, and b) that Obama himself was responsible through his prior announcement and withdrawal of troops for the state of the conflict today.
Obama's inability to see things through to resolution has created a world that is far less safe than it was when he took office, and the position of the United States as a world leader has suffered as a result of his meandering policies.
Obama, perhaps because he was not a party to is formulation, did not understand the Powell Doctrine...if you decide to fight, fight to win.
The handcuffs on the military responses in Afghanistan, and elsewhere too, were Obama's handiwork.
And if the mistakes that he made are to be corrected, it is axiomatic that the necessary corrections be implemented.
You can't have it both ways, ladies and gentlemen, that's not the way the real world works.
2
One of the fundamental principles of our government is that the military is overseen by civilians. Mattis knows this. The fact that he has agreed to violate this principle is evidence of the contempt he holds for Trump.
When the cabinet was assembled for its loyalty pledge, Mattis refused to play along, saying he was honored to work for American men and women in uniform. Unlike his colleagues, including the despicable Pence, Mattis made no mention of how "honored" he was to work for Trump.
When the cabinet was assembled for its loyalty pledge, Mattis refused to play along, saying he was honored to work for American men and women in uniform. Unlike his colleagues, including the despicable Pence, Mattis made no mention of how "honored" he was to work for Trump.
1
Why would the President take the responsibility of his office and subject himself to the kind of criticism he ignorantly levied against Obama and Bush. I can hear him now when the build up fails to create "winning": " I didn't make that decision, you can't really say I made that decision... I DID give authority over military decisions to General Mattis. He's a wonderful person, a fantastic general, I have confidence in him....I can't say I always agree with him, but it was his decision to increase the troops."
WHy are we in Afghanistan? We are not "winning". If we did "win" what would we win? The responsibility of managing another place theat does not want us? Give them arms to fight their own battles and bring our troops home. You cannot fight a conventional war against guerrila type tactics in someone eles country whose residents don't want you there.
Trump wants to outsource the responsibility, will happily take full credit for anything positive that might happen, and will definitely blame Mattis if it doesn't work out well.
This is what passes for "leadership" with the Fool in the WH. There is no strategy on anything because he can't see further than the end of his nose or the reflection in the mirror. He hasn't got a clue what he is doing, and he can't lay all of it on his children.
I have an idea, let's outsource the presidency to someone responsible and not a member of the GOP.
This is what passes for "leadership" with the Fool in the WH. There is no strategy on anything because he can't see further than the end of his nose or the reflection in the mirror. He hasn't got a clue what he is doing, and he can't lay all of it on his children.
I have an idea, let's outsource the presidency to someone responsible and not a member of the GOP.
Trump + Afghanistan: what could go wrong? There are two things that need to happen in Afghanistan in order to make any progress and our Dear Leader is clueless about both of them. The first is to put the boot on Pakistan to get them to stop supporting the Taliban and other insurgent elements and the 2nd is to encourage the Chinese to put pressure on the Taliban in exchange for supporting a role for the Taliban in any future government.(I wonder if Dear Leader knows that China and Afghanistan share a border). The fact is that the Taliban are not going to go away: not militarily, not culturally and not economically. The US will never accept a major role for the Taliban so our continued involvement is not in the best interest of the Afghan people. Our best move would be to get out but to keep Afghanistan from fracturing like Syria and to make Afghanistan an issue for the region not for the court of King Donald.
I just love the opportunity for us to pursue a failed policy and be able to eliminate our prized possession, our troops. Let's put Trumpy and Kushner on the front line and see how quickly this failed policy is eliminated.
Trying to defeat the Taliban in Afghanistan is like trying to defeat the GOP in the U.S. Whether we like it or not, both movements have the support of the local populace. The only way to remove that support is through multi-generational information/education campaigns. We've seen how hard that is with GOP supporters...
1
America should pull its troops out of Afghanistan, because we have no more enemies left to fight, and it's time to stop paying them to like us. No more soccer fields. No more schools. No more hospitals. Let them enjoy life as the 7th-century country they want to be.
1
Why is the US military actually in Afghanistan? What strategic purpose is being pursued, however unsuccessfully? Can anyone give a clear, one sentence answer to that?
Put somewhat differently, from which harm is the US being protected by conducting a war in South West Asia? Isn't it in fact more the case that the continued presence of American forces is inciting people to see the US, and the West, as an enemy?
Now, there are beneficiaries for sure. The military brass likes having a war around, to try out new tactics and weapon systems, get a feel for battle, "bloody" subalterns, create opportunities for advancement and awards. The PMC's love making oodles of money as sub-contractors for various services for the military and other government agencies. The purveyors of weapons, too, love a real live testing ground in which they can kill actual people, who are not registered voters. And the Afghan government couldn't function without a steady inflow of American cash, no questions asked.
But the West? The USA? What do they stand to gain by keeping this fire burning?
Put somewhat differently, from which harm is the US being protected by conducting a war in South West Asia? Isn't it in fact more the case that the continued presence of American forces is inciting people to see the US, and the West, as an enemy?
Now, there are beneficiaries for sure. The military brass likes having a war around, to try out new tactics and weapon systems, get a feel for battle, "bloody" subalterns, create opportunities for advancement and awards. The PMC's love making oodles of money as sub-contractors for various services for the military and other government agencies. The purveyors of weapons, too, love a real live testing ground in which they can kill actual people, who are not registered voters. And the Afghan government couldn't function without a steady inflow of American cash, no questions asked.
But the West? The USA? What do they stand to gain by keeping this fire burning?
2
Spectator in chief. Such a contrast to his predecessor, who gave you the sense that he had his hand, or at least his brain, in just about everything impacting the citizens of this country. Trump's absence really struck me as looming large when the mayor of New Orleans made that fantastic speech about hate and race relations in America. You would have thought that he could have at least acknowledged the sentiment in one of his morning Tweets. But nothing, at least that I saw. If Afghanistan is the place where civilizations go to die, we've got the perfect president for it.
2
Tim Allen had the answer in Home Improvement: MORE POWER.
George B. McClellon had the answer after Bull Run: MORE TROOPS.
William Westmoreland had the answer in Vietnam: MORE TROOPS.
If things aren't going well what's the answer? MORE TROOPS and MORE POWER.
The War in Afghanistan does not appear to be going well. What's the answer? MORE TROOPS.
Rarely does the standard answer work.
George B. McClellon had the answer after Bull Run: MORE TROOPS.
William Westmoreland had the answer in Vietnam: MORE TROOPS.
If things aren't going well what's the answer? MORE TROOPS and MORE POWER.
The War in Afghanistan does not appear to be going well. What's the answer? MORE TROOPS.
Rarely does the standard answer work.
1
Obama has clearly been interested in solving the problem in Afghanistan, but after two disastrous decade-long wars, he knew that the American people wanted to withdraw all troops, and fast, so his hands were tight.
A new president, and one who's cultivating the image of being a bully, could probable be more successful in selling yet another "surge" to the American people ... IF he would get involved and if it's part of a comprehensive political strategy for the region.
Despite all the campaign rhetoric about "General Patton", Trump now seems to be at least aware of the fact that he doesn't know anything about foreign policy, and apparently doesn't want to start studying the problem either (because how do you study a complicated foreign policy issue when you only read pages filled with nothing but bullet points ...?).
But that means leaving a political void precisely at a moment when the battle against terrorism enters a crucial phase.
At least Obama was "leading from behind", rather than not leading at all. Trump claimed to be the "only one" who could fix all problems, but since he came to the White House, the Republican establishment clearly took over again (Trumpcare is nothing but Ryancare, for instance, and the very opposite of what he promised to do on health care), when it comes to writing bills. Unfortunately, foreign policy is less about signing bills into law and requires real experts and some real thinking from the White House...
A new president, and one who's cultivating the image of being a bully, could probable be more successful in selling yet another "surge" to the American people ... IF he would get involved and if it's part of a comprehensive political strategy for the region.
Despite all the campaign rhetoric about "General Patton", Trump now seems to be at least aware of the fact that he doesn't know anything about foreign policy, and apparently doesn't want to start studying the problem either (because how do you study a complicated foreign policy issue when you only read pages filled with nothing but bullet points ...?).
But that means leaving a political void precisely at a moment when the battle against terrorism enters a crucial phase.
At least Obama was "leading from behind", rather than not leading at all. Trump claimed to be the "only one" who could fix all problems, but since he came to the White House, the Republican establishment clearly took over again (Trumpcare is nothing but Ryancare, for instance, and the very opposite of what he promised to do on health care), when it comes to writing bills. Unfortunately, foreign policy is less about signing bills into law and requires real experts and some real thinking from the White House...
The word was out when Trump was VP shopping that his campaign offered Gov. Kasischke the job, with the advice that Kasischke would do the work, and Donnie would be busy "Making America Great Again."
This is what the campaign meant. No heavy lifting for Donnie. Tweeting, golfing, signing Executive Orders, having the Cabinet grovel before him, and doing campaign rallies are the only parts of the job he wants to do.
Are we winning yet?
This is what the campaign meant. No heavy lifting for Donnie. Tweeting, golfing, signing Executive Orders, having the Cabinet grovel before him, and doing campaign rallies are the only parts of the job he wants to do.
Are we winning yet?
Pet dogs, when faced with timid or reticent owners; will assert their natural tendencies to the detriment of the pet & owner alike.
The same is true with America's involvement in Afghanistan, especially under the trump administration.
For the president/commander in chief of the United States to be disengaged in the decision making process, while hamstringing both our armed forces (by not developing & executing a clear agenda for our troops) & the State Department (by restricting its ability to engage in developing a stated goal to bring this war to conclusion), trump is backing off of the president's most sacred duty to the nation.
Such inaction doesn't serve the America's interests & will only play into the hands of those we're fighting against. The Taliban & other groups can clearly see the vacuum created by lack of leadership from the president. As a result they will become emboldened in their resistance as they fight to take over all of Afghanistan.
What message does this send to all the American service members who've served there? What message does this send to the wounded veterans & to the families of those who gave the ultimate sacrifice for our country?
President trump's lack of ability to embrace leadership in this conflict, while continuing to risk American & Afghani's lives is dereliction of duty. He is violating his oath of office.
Congress has the responsibility to remedy this cowardly act if this president!
The same is true with America's involvement in Afghanistan, especially under the trump administration.
For the president/commander in chief of the United States to be disengaged in the decision making process, while hamstringing both our armed forces (by not developing & executing a clear agenda for our troops) & the State Department (by restricting its ability to engage in developing a stated goal to bring this war to conclusion), trump is backing off of the president's most sacred duty to the nation.
Such inaction doesn't serve the America's interests & will only play into the hands of those we're fighting against. The Taliban & other groups can clearly see the vacuum created by lack of leadership from the president. As a result they will become emboldened in their resistance as they fight to take over all of Afghanistan.
What message does this send to all the American service members who've served there? What message does this send to the wounded veterans & to the families of those who gave the ultimate sacrifice for our country?
President trump's lack of ability to embrace leadership in this conflict, while continuing to risk American & Afghani's lives is dereliction of duty. He is violating his oath of office.
Congress has the responsibility to remedy this cowardly act if this president!
Afghanistan and Iraq seem to have an unlimited supply of young men willing to fight for the Taliban and ISIS. Can we shoot them all? Can we shoot enough for our corrupt, greedy, and fractured friends to hold power and govern a stable nation? Impossible.
Long past time to leave. Indeed, our security may be enhanced when we are no longer dropping bombs on their homeland.
Long past time to leave. Indeed, our security may be enhanced when we are no longer dropping bombs on their homeland.
As someone that has seen both conflicts, to answer your question honestly, we could kill every man, woman, child, goat, dog and ANT in both countries, if we so choose, and in fact, we could do it with fairly few casualties. Most of the people that post on this forum have no idea that, almost everywhere, our troops fight with one hand tied behind their back, and the other has ridiculous rules it has to obey.
We can easily be like the Romans, leaving a desert, and calling it peace, and all the combined militaries of the world could not stop us, without resorting to nuclear weapons.
The issue is, do you want to live in the country that treats major metropolitan areas like it is the jungle of Vietnam, and kills people on a scale equal to Hitler, Stalin, or Mao?
We can easily be like the Romans, leaving a desert, and calling it peace, and all the combined militaries of the world could not stop us, without resorting to nuclear weapons.
The issue is, do you want to live in the country that treats major metropolitan areas like it is the jungle of Vietnam, and kills people on a scale equal to Hitler, Stalin, or Mao?
I thought Mr. Trump was allegedly smarter than the generals and admirals?
War (if one is serious about it) requires coordinated effort and leadership from across and outside government. Lives are on the line...
www.thewaryouknow.com
War (if one is serious about it) requires coordinated effort and leadership from across and outside government. Lives are on the line...
www.thewaryouknow.com
I trust Secretary Mattis. But I think that he needs to do the following:
1. Explain his view of we are at war with Afghanistan.
2. Admit that the Taliban is an opium drug cartel, not a group of fundamentalist Muslims. Tell the truth.
3. Explain why we haven't destroyed the opium fields a thousand times over.
4. Explain that the only way to end this war is through extreme brutality, which would likely include going door to door in all of the cites around Kabul and arresting or killing anyone with a weapons.
5. Explain the only positive alternative would be to invest in educational institutions there, and offer substantial military protection of each school for 3 generations. after first having destroyed the opium.
Or explain that we have bigger military problems that would be better served by focusing on them: Russian Cyberwar agaisnt ourselves and NATO; North Korea.
I'm not losing sleep at night thinking about Afghanistan. I am seething mad about Russia, and I am acutely aware that NK is working feverishly, day and night, to develop nuclear weapons that can strike America.
Focus on that.
1. Explain his view of we are at war with Afghanistan.
2. Admit that the Taliban is an opium drug cartel, not a group of fundamentalist Muslims. Tell the truth.
3. Explain why we haven't destroyed the opium fields a thousand times over.
4. Explain that the only way to end this war is through extreme brutality, which would likely include going door to door in all of the cites around Kabul and arresting or killing anyone with a weapons.
5. Explain the only positive alternative would be to invest in educational institutions there, and offer substantial military protection of each school for 3 generations. after first having destroyed the opium.
Or explain that we have bigger military problems that would be better served by focusing on them: Russian Cyberwar agaisnt ourselves and NATO; North Korea.
I'm not losing sleep at night thinking about Afghanistan. I am seething mad about Russia, and I am acutely aware that NK is working feverishly, day and night, to develop nuclear weapons that can strike America.
Focus on that.
1 would be nice.
2 is incorrect. The Taliban are both, and they are not mutually exclusive, given that the Taliban are willing to be hypocrites.
3 would take too much effort, and besides, much of the local and regional Pashtun leadership are the real drug lords (the Taliban are more like the Zetas; they make more money from "taxing" the drug cartels than they do from trafficking). The biggest drug lord in Afghanistan when I was last there was Hamid Karzai's brother.
4 isn't far off, though you could simply disarm the population, an idea that might be tried all around the Middle East.
5 would NEVER work. That you pose it as possible is disappointing.
2 is incorrect. The Taliban are both, and they are not mutually exclusive, given that the Taliban are willing to be hypocrites.
3 would take too much effort, and besides, much of the local and regional Pashtun leadership are the real drug lords (the Taliban are more like the Zetas; they make more money from "taxing" the drug cartels than they do from trafficking). The biggest drug lord in Afghanistan when I was last there was Hamid Karzai's brother.
4 isn't far off, though you could simply disarm the population, an idea that might be tried all around the Middle East.
5 would NEVER work. That you pose it as possible is disappointing.
Now that Donald Trump has Afghanistan dropped in his lap, he should at least question some leaders of that country, or even a go-between, to determine how they have been able to defeat so many invaders over thousands of years. Perhaps we could learn a thing or two, and put no more "boots on the ground", unless the boots belong to those advocating MORE U.S. "boots on the ground". I really doubt that any member of Congress or their relatives will be wearing those boots. It is much easier for them to send "other people's children" overseas to die.............
Nothing to learn. They are willing to bang their heads against the proverbial wall (translation, allow their sons to die and die, until they get what they want), until we tire of the conflict.
The denizens of Afghanistan have rarely actually won a war. They simply refuse to acknowledge that they are defeated, and continue fighting until the other side gets tired, and leaves, even when that takes decades.
The denizens of Afghanistan have rarely actually won a war. They simply refuse to acknowledge that they are defeated, and continue fighting until the other side gets tired, and leaves, even when that takes decades.
You forget, Mr. Trump knows more than the generals.
I dimly recall he said something about bombing something out of ISIS, which, at the time I thought, "Now, why didn't anyone else ever think about that beofre?"
Personally, I take my guidance from George Carlin (may he rest in peace) who often began his riff on Vietnam with, "Oh, you remember why we're there..." and then a long silence while the audience looked around at each other and then started laughing because they realized nobody had the faintest idea why we were there.
I suspect we are in Afghanistan for that time honored American reason for remaining in foreign places we don't understand...we don't know how to get out.
We don't want to leave without winning.
And what would "winning be?" The Times has run articles about our "allies" among the Afghani army who chained young boys to bedposts, so they could rape them at night, and how, the American officer who objected to this behavior was himself cashiered for offending Afghani cultural sensibilities.
As Carlin observed, we should just pull out, but it's not manly to pull out.
Wouldn't want to do that.
For an America First guy, our Donald seems to be forgetting himself.
I dimly recall he said something about bombing something out of ISIS, which, at the time I thought, "Now, why didn't anyone else ever think about that beofre?"
Personally, I take my guidance from George Carlin (may he rest in peace) who often began his riff on Vietnam with, "Oh, you remember why we're there..." and then a long silence while the audience looked around at each other and then started laughing because they realized nobody had the faintest idea why we were there.
I suspect we are in Afghanistan for that time honored American reason for remaining in foreign places we don't understand...we don't know how to get out.
We don't want to leave without winning.
And what would "winning be?" The Times has run articles about our "allies" among the Afghani army who chained young boys to bedposts, so they could rape them at night, and how, the American officer who objected to this behavior was himself cashiered for offending Afghani cultural sensibilities.
As Carlin observed, we should just pull out, but it's not manly to pull out.
Wouldn't want to do that.
For an America First guy, our Donald seems to be forgetting himself.
The Editorial Board seems to be well versed in the chain of command as well as military strategy and tactics as well as the nuances of international diplomacy. In short, The Board is the complete package. Perhaps The Board would be good enough to volunteer to clean up the messes US global interventionalism has created since WWII. Could you take care of it by Veterans Day, please?
1
There is no way to win this war,There never will be.Russia is now supplying the Taliban as we did when they were fighting the war.Learn the lesson America get out.
As I was listening to CNN comments after the DC baseball field shooting I heard Congressman Chuck Fleischmann say "he always felt safe playing baseball...but after this he didn't know if he would ever feel safe playing it again". Chuck, I'm a Marine Corps Vietnam vet, I served on a tank for 13 months in 1968-69, and with that said I would like to welcome Rep. Fleischmann to our world. PTSD! Compared to the grunts I worked with on a daily basis, being on a tank was a summer vacation. Grunts experienced the horrors of close combat during their 13 month tour on a daily basis. And believe me, it does not go away and you have to learn ways to cope with it. It changes your life forever.
My point is for you to make this experience your personal mission to insure the VA continues to provide the best mental and medical services to our past veterans, and to the ones we continue to create on a daily basis in such endless and insane wars as Afghanistan and Iraq. Both of which you have and continue to support.
Chuck, it's your turn at bat, let's see what your made of.
Semper Fi
My point is for you to make this experience your personal mission to insure the VA continues to provide the best mental and medical services to our past veterans, and to the ones we continue to create on a daily basis in such endless and insane wars as Afghanistan and Iraq. Both of which you have and continue to support.
Chuck, it's your turn at bat, let's see what your made of.
Semper Fi
1
Giving up civilian control over the military is going down the road of perdition for the nation.
2
"That is, at bottom, Mr. Trump’s responsibility [dealing with Afghanistan], and at the moment the nation has no idea what he thinks or where he is headed."
Uh, based on the Orange Wonder's performance so far, let me venture responses to these two concerns: What he thinks? Not much. Where he is headed? Nowhere good. As with just about everything that goes with the job of being president, the guy demonstrates daily that he is in way, way over his head.
Uh, based on the Orange Wonder's performance so far, let me venture responses to these two concerns: What he thinks? Not much. Where he is headed? Nowhere good. As with just about everything that goes with the job of being president, the guy demonstrates daily that he is in way, way over his head.
Secretary Mattis is well-qualified to assume the duty. He’s a professional.
1
For 16 years we wasted lives and money trying to establish some form of democracy in a nation that's largely illererate and tribal in their shifting loyalties. It's time to accept what the British and Russians already know, there's no "winning" in Afghanistan. Unless of course you're a lobbyist for private contractors with generous DOD contracts.
1
Russia could not make a stable Afghanistan. Great Britain could not make a stable Afghanistan. Heck, Alexander the Great could not make a stable Afghanistan. This is a 'country' whose great national pastime is the clan feud, making the Hatfields and McCoys look like Damion and Pythias.
The only result of pouring more money into it will be making some warlords richer. The only result of pouring more troops into it will be making more American families smaller. GET OUT! Let them fight among themselves and only return with very limited strikes with a single defined target if there is an attack on America launched by an Afghan group. Otherwise, not our circus, not our monkeys.
The only result of pouring more money into it will be making some warlords richer. The only result of pouring more troops into it will be making more American families smaller. GET OUT! Let them fight among themselves and only return with very limited strikes with a single defined target if there is an attack on America launched by an Afghan group. Otherwise, not our circus, not our monkeys.
Three soldiers with the 101st Airborne were returned to Dover AFB yesterday. They were killed by a suicide infiltrator while working to train the Afghan Army. One of those killed was a 22 year old sargent. He was in the first grade when we went to war in Afghanistan. This war does not belong to Bush, Obama or Trump. It belongs to the readers of this paper and every other citizen who through their elected officials have chosen to demand no accountability for a plan, no requirement for an end and have chosen to hire out this conflict to the 1% of it's young men and women willing to step up and do this dirty job. I bet most people don't know these young men died, let alone who they were or that 3 spouces and 5 children are going to be without a father on Fathers Day.
Mr. Obama rightly accepted the Afghan war when becoming president and nothing good happened. Now Mr. Trump has the same chance to similarly fail.
... and he will. that's a given, as was/is anything else he's done, including the latest --- reinstating cuba sanctions.
It has been 240 years since America's founding. Ironically we have been at war for 220 of those years, counting domestic and foreign wars. During the 18th and 19th Centuries, when land was the main source of wealth, those wars were fought for land.
In the 20th Century, America joined two Great World Wars to put a halt to murderous Authoritarian Regimes; unify the world in peace and justice, and promote universal economic prosperity.
Today, we are at war with whom we call Terrorists and our enemies call Freedom Fighters. President George W. Bush's War is now a part of Trump's "Jobs Program".
Bottom line today: Our wars are best for the economy when they are enduringly unwinnable.
In the 20th Century, America joined two Great World Wars to put a halt to murderous Authoritarian Regimes; unify the world in peace and justice, and promote universal economic prosperity.
Today, we are at war with whom we call Terrorists and our enemies call Freedom Fighters. President George W. Bush's War is now a part of Trump's "Jobs Program".
Bottom line today: Our wars are best for the economy when they are enduringly unwinnable.
3
I believe that the removal of Karzai was a major mistake. With all the democratic veneer it looked like an American coup. And it reminded me of South Vietnam that saw similar US sponsored regime changes. Problem is that the new rulers look like colonial pawns that can at any time be replaced if what they do doesn't please the US. That undermines their effectiveness.
As a soldier Mattis has no influence on Pakistan - the main supporter of the Taliban. am curious to see what will happen when he realizes that.
As a soldier Mattis has no influence on Pakistan - the main supporter of the Taliban. am curious to see what will happen when he realizes that.
3
If Trump was the one who, in his own words, knew more than the generals about ISIS, etc., why is he delegating the responsibility?
15
How odd that Trump, who bragged during the presidential campaign that he knows more than the generals, now defers to the generals on such a crucial decision about prolonging the endless war in Afghanistan. It is a decision that requires civilian intervention by the commander-in-chief because the generals, just like in Vietnam, are inclined to always see the light at the end of the tunnel.
7
As the Cheshire Cat said, "If you don't know where you're going, any road will take you there."
You have framed the situation well. We have been playing chess, examining two or three moves, one move deep. There never seems to be a clear picture of what we expect after we throw more lives, materiel, money and our credibility into Afghanistan. Trump's abdication notwithstanding, we really need to see a clear-eyed and cogent plan with quantified, risk-adjusted costs and benefits.
It seems that what has been taking place is a lot of posturing and positioning to avoid accountability in the final reckoning. It's becoming eminently clear after all this time, that this is not a winnable war for anyone. Given that, it may be time for us to step back and let Afghanistan work itself out, or not.
You have framed the situation well. We have been playing chess, examining two or three moves, one move deep. There never seems to be a clear picture of what we expect after we throw more lives, materiel, money and our credibility into Afghanistan. Trump's abdication notwithstanding, we really need to see a clear-eyed and cogent plan with quantified, risk-adjusted costs and benefits.
It seems that what has been taking place is a lot of posturing and positioning to avoid accountability in the final reckoning. It's becoming eminently clear after all this time, that this is not a winnable war for anyone. Given that, it may be time for us to step back and let Afghanistan work itself out, or not.
8
The hawks said if we end the war in Vietnam and pull out all of Southeast Asia will fall to the communists. We ended the war, we pulled out and all of Southeast Asia did not fall to the communists. Actually today Vietnam is doing very well commercially. We even appear to like them now.
Afghanistan is the 21st century Vietnam. No end game, no exit strategy. Ask the Russians who fought there beginning in 1979 and finally pulled out in 1988. Sound familiar. It’s a never-win situation. “But we have to stay and fight otherwise terrorism will get worse.” American being there for 16 years, with no end in sight has NOT stopped terrorism. Quite the contrary.
Afghanistan is the 21st century Vietnam. No end game, no exit strategy. Ask the Russians who fought there beginning in 1979 and finally pulled out in 1988. Sound familiar. It’s a never-win situation. “But we have to stay and fight otherwise terrorism will get worse.” American being there for 16 years, with no end in sight has NOT stopped terrorism. Quite the contrary.
5
A reminder: NYT on Barack Obama's (cowardly) decision to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan: "Courageous and sound."
4
Every president from Kennedy to Obama has thought that the way to "win" an asymmetrical war - especially against a non-state group is to keep escalating troops until the enemy "loses heart." It hasn't worked yet, and won't work now. Trump is being particularly cowardly about it since he has out-sourced the job of deciding on how many troops to send to SecDef Mattis (there are another 4,000 troops on their way as of this time). This way, Trump can distance himself from any troop decision or war plan. If we succeed (extremely unlikely), he'll take all the credit. If the 17-year war just keeps chugging along & American casualties start to rise again with increased boots on the ground, he always has Mattis to blame. Some Commander-in-Chief Trump is. The buck always stops anywhere but Trump's desk. We should re-title him the Commander-in-Absentia or the Commander-in-Tweets.
I love all these comments about Trump abrogating his responsibility by handing things to Mattis. Did FDR abrogate his responsibilities when he handed-over Europe (and North Africa) to Eisenhower? Was FDR also a feckless leader when he split the Pacific between Nimitz and MacArthur? Perhaps Truman was just a spineless coward when he turned-over Korea to first MacArthur and then Clark?
The last century has shown us that when the politicians hand-over wars to the military, we excel, and when political leaders try to manage wars, we fail dismally. It has also shown us that, if you leave your enemies a safe haven, they will use it, and you will lose, no matter how successful on the battlefield (everyone seems to forget that in 12 years of Vietnam, we didn't lose a single engagement fought at the battalion level or higher, something that can also be said of both Iraq and Afghanistan).
As a final note, just stop and think for a minute. Who do you want to be making the decisions about how to fight a war, Trump, or Mattis? It's up to Trump to decide IF we continue to fight the war, but once that decision is made, we should be thankful that he is willing to delegate to those FAR more competent than he is.
The last century has shown us that when the politicians hand-over wars to the military, we excel, and when political leaders try to manage wars, we fail dismally. It has also shown us that, if you leave your enemies a safe haven, they will use it, and you will lose, no matter how successful on the battlefield (everyone seems to forget that in 12 years of Vietnam, we didn't lose a single engagement fought at the battalion level or higher, something that can also be said of both Iraq and Afghanistan).
As a final note, just stop and think for a minute. Who do you want to be making the decisions about how to fight a war, Trump, or Mattis? It's up to Trump to decide IF we continue to fight the war, but once that decision is made, we should be thankful that he is willing to delegate to those FAR more competent than he is.
4
WW2 made exceptionally complex strategic demands on the presidency. Arguably no Commander-in-Chief of any country ever has had more responsibility than FDR from 1941-1945 -- directing air, land, and sea deployments on fronts in Europe, Africa, and the Pacific, as well as a war footing at home. Roosevelt was deeply involved in the conduct of the war, both directly with US commanders and through George Marshall, and in mobilizing the home front. To claim that he abdicated responsibility to generals is a misreading of history.
5
These presidents were still in charge. They had the final decision on all military activities, like the bombing of Tokyo, invasion of France, bombing of Hiroshima, escalations in Vietnam, invasion of Iraq. They handed the war-fighting responsibility over to their subordinates, the generals, as they should, but the Commanders-in-Chief were still ultimately responsible for the strategic conduct of the military. Trump has handed even that, the total responsibility, over to Mattis.
Well, it isn't really just "IF we continue to fight". It's what we are fighting for. War should have a purpose: in WWII our purpose was pretty clear: it was to defeat Germany and Japan in the conventional everyone involved understood. In Korea our purpose was less clear. Did we want to repel an invasion, or did we want to take over the whole country? Military decisions didn't coincide with political purposes. We invaded Afghanistan with the wrong purpose - we should have been going after Al Qaeda, but the Bush administration chose to try to remake the whole country. Now we are deeply embedded, but with nothing to win, except another day without a major disaster.
What we should have learned in Vietnam was that you can win battle after battle, and it's meaningless if you have no valid purpose in being there to begin with.
What we should have learned in Vietnam was that you can win battle after battle, and it's meaningless if you have no valid purpose in being there to begin with.
I believe it was Clinton who inserted the US into this pointless conflict to begin with. BOTH Bush and Obama expanded and extended US presence there. If Obama had ended US presence there during the 8 years in which he was POTUS, then Trump would not be expanded that presence now. Don't try to pretend Trump is not doing what both Bush and everyone's hero, Obama did before him.
3
American military involvement in the greater Middle East goes back to the 70s. The situation in Afghanistan is a result of the Bush administration's decision after 9/11 to seek regime change in Afghanistan as opposed to apprehending the perpetrators.
3
@corn bred: You believe incorrectly. The U.S. invaded Afghanistan after the September 11, 2001 attacks, basically in order to get their revenge on Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden. Not saying Clinton wouldn't have done the same thing, but if we're going to blame someone, blame the person who actually did make that decision.
Clinton did not put boots on the ground in Iraq. He did try to destroy what was left of Saddam's WMD capabilities in the 4-day Desert Fox bombing (successfully as inspectors later found out). He also launched one Tomahawk missile at an al-Qaeda training camp after the CIA confirmed bin-Laden was there at a meeting (bin-Laden left just before the missile arrived). But, don't blame Clinton for trying to overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan. Both he & Bush (pre-9/11) were on speaking terms with the Taliban. Clinton's only concern was al-Qaeda. Even then, the GOP blocked just about every anti-terrorism bill Clinton tried to get passed, claiming he was just "wagging the dog" to distract the country from our "real" crisis - the stain on Monica Lewinsky's blue dress. After 9/11, Bush pulled out Clinton's bills & resubmitted them. This time the GOP let them pass. Clinton had even given Bush a number of options, including a battle plan to invade Afghanistan & capture bin-Laden. Bush used the plan, but modified it (tragically) to include taking on the entire Taliban as well & trying to install a leader who would okay the UNOCAL pipeline his administration wanted to build.
1
Every American soldier deployed to the Middle East is a victory for the jihadists and Saudis.
42
When, in 1990/91, the Saudis were afraid that Iraqi Shi'ites might be planning to invade eastern SA (a minority Shi'ite region with most of the oil), bin-Laden, who had disbanded al-Qaeda after kicking the Russians out of Afghanistan, volunteered to call back his fighters to protect the Saudi-Iraqi border. Bin-Laden was horrified at the idea of "infidel" boots on the ground in holy SA, so he wanted the Royal Family to use Muslim fighters, not Americans. The Royal Family chose the Americans and exiled bin-Laden when he complained. By 1996, long after the Iraq invasion threat was over, American soldiers were still encamped in SA. Bin-Laden was so outraged that he issued his first fatwa declaring war on the "infidel" Americans who did not leave SA after the Gulf War, but appeared to be setting up military camps to stay indefinitely. That was the grievance that provoked bin-Laden & al-Qaeda to declare war against the United States - and that was started under George H. W. Bush's administration & continued by Clinton's, Dubya's, Obama's, and now Trump's.
...and Boeing.
NOT my president
NOT my president
Yes, Doug, and I'm sad to say, we can add that every American soldier deployed to the Middle East is a victory for the American big bucks Trump 2020 PAC donor defense contractors.
Our men and women in uniform should not fight endlessly for every spineless President, who needs political cover, and every elderly general, vassal to the commander-in chief, who took 5 draft deferrals for remarkably questionable medical conditions.
5
Like Bush, Cheney, & Trump. Of course Trump's three oldest kids were old enough to fight in the first Gulf War and Iraq/Afghanistan, but the military was all-volunteer by then, and the kids were more interested in making more money and living the luxurious life while their "lessers" were sent to fight and die.
"So far the Pentagon is running the show, largely by default."
The editorial board obviously hasn't noticed but the Pentagon has been running the foreign policy show for quite a few years now most disasterly in Syria where Ash Carter and the Pentagon repeatedly undermined the efforts of John Kerry and President Obama to reach an agreement with the Russians towards ending the savage war in that country.
It is sad to watch the present Secretray of State floundering around the world making announcements that are quickly negated by secretive military power- brokers. On the positive side, quite a few dollars can be saved from the national budget by shutting down the now-irrelevant State Department since "The Department of War" has taken over its duties.
The editorial board obviously hasn't noticed but the Pentagon has been running the foreign policy show for quite a few years now most disasterly in Syria where Ash Carter and the Pentagon repeatedly undermined the efforts of John Kerry and President Obama to reach an agreement with the Russians towards ending the savage war in that country.
It is sad to watch the present Secretray of State floundering around the world making announcements that are quickly negated by secretive military power- brokers. On the positive side, quite a few dollars can be saved from the national budget by shutting down the now-irrelevant State Department since "The Department of War" has taken over its duties.
4
And before that, it was Rumsfeld & Cheney, with the help of Gen. Myers, who ran the wars under the Bush administration. BTW, the State Department has many, many responsibilities other than our moronic Middle East excursions. It was Admiral James Crowe who said in 1990 that "[t]o be a great president, you have to have a war. All the great presidents have had their wars."
My first thought would be "is this such a bad thing" letting a military guy actually look after Afghanistan?
However in consideration, a military guy wants to win and will demand the resources to ensure that victory.
They would likely never say… other considerations
like the ongoing cost of this war in men, material and money
the significant level of civilian casualties
even whether it would be better to simply withdraw and let the locals settle it
are more important.
Isn’t that the President’s job?
However in consideration, a military guy wants to win and will demand the resources to ensure that victory.
They would likely never say… other considerations
like the ongoing cost of this war in men, material and money
the significant level of civilian casualties
even whether it would be better to simply withdraw and let the locals settle it
are more important.
Isn’t that the President’s job?
4
What exactly does "win" mean in any of these Whack-A-Mole conflicts in the Middle East, anyway? That's the Commander-in-Chief's job, & I haven't heard it done since WW II ended. There is no military victory against a world-wide ideology, so what else do we have to do? Withdraw and let the combatants settle it among themselves?
as soon as we get a president - we'll tell him
Having spent five years in Afghanistan (between 2004 and 2014) I am convinced that the fundamental problem is governance failure.
1) Local government: Karzai and now Ghani have refused to implement the 2004 Constitutional provisions for elections for mayors and for city, district and village councils. The U.S. has acquiesced. To this day, every mayor in the country is appointed by the President and councils do not exist. Would Americans put up with this? When local government is corrupt or incompetent, citizens have absolutely no recourse--except for taking up guns.
2) National: The 2014 Presidential Runoff Election was marked by fraud--particularly the suspiciously high number of ballots cast in Pashtun areas. (I was in Kabul analyzing polling station level data.) Secretary Kerry swooped in and brokered a deal between Ghani and Abdullah—an extra-Constitutional deal with no allocation of authority, and no legal basis for resolving disputes about who is in charge of what. Think back to 2004 Bush vs Gore: Did anyone suggest splitting the difference? Of course not, yet we thought this was OK for the Afghans.
Troops cannot not settle a conflict that is fundamentally about governance--not a conflict between Taliban and government, but about the relationship between citizens and their own government.
The most useful thing we could do at this point is restrain Pakistan and leave the Afghans to sort out their own governance problems.
1) Local government: Karzai and now Ghani have refused to implement the 2004 Constitutional provisions for elections for mayors and for city, district and village councils. The U.S. has acquiesced. To this day, every mayor in the country is appointed by the President and councils do not exist. Would Americans put up with this? When local government is corrupt or incompetent, citizens have absolutely no recourse--except for taking up guns.
2) National: The 2014 Presidential Runoff Election was marked by fraud--particularly the suspiciously high number of ballots cast in Pashtun areas. (I was in Kabul analyzing polling station level data.) Secretary Kerry swooped in and brokered a deal between Ghani and Abdullah—an extra-Constitutional deal with no allocation of authority, and no legal basis for resolving disputes about who is in charge of what. Think back to 2004 Bush vs Gore: Did anyone suggest splitting the difference? Of course not, yet we thought this was OK for the Afghans.
Troops cannot not settle a conflict that is fundamentally about governance--not a conflict between Taliban and government, but about the relationship between citizens and their own government.
The most useful thing we could do at this point is restrain Pakistan and leave the Afghans to sort out their own governance problems.
9
Pakistan is our "regional partner"? Were it not for that country and its security service the Afghan Taliban would have no refuge to plan its attacks and to train its insurgents. We need to stop treating Islamabad as our ally and to start threatening its leaders with the same sort of sanctions we apply to the far-less-dangerous Iran.
BTW: We've spent 15 years ostensibly training the Afghan military to defend their country. How much longer do we need to be there until they're fully trained? Perhaps our feckless leader should delegate the responsibility to the NRA: give them the opportunity to hand every Afghan a gun and a year's supply of ammunition (charge it to the Pentagon) and get our troops the heck out of there.
BTW: We've spent 15 years ostensibly training the Afghan military to defend their country. How much longer do we need to be there until they're fully trained? Perhaps our feckless leader should delegate the responsibility to the NRA: give them the opportunity to hand every Afghan a gun and a year's supply of ammunition (charge it to the Pentagon) and get our troops the heck out of there.
8
we kow tow to Pakistan because they have the bomb. we can well expect them to furnish one for an attack on the west in the best of circumstances
Where is the diplomatic initiative in Afghanistan? Mr Trump is de-funding the State department, and the generals like Mr Mattis have told him, that if he does that he will have to buy the US forces "more bullets".
Mr Trump is not only ignoring Afghanistan, he's actively seeking to make the situation worse. That whole area, as President Obama understood, is like the Middle East [unstable], but with Nukes. "Winning" constitutes braking it's descent into chaos, and that requires firm, and consistent, diplomatic engagement. Not military.
Mr Trump is not only ignoring Afghanistan, he's actively seeking to make the situation worse. That whole area, as President Obama understood, is like the Middle East [unstable], but with Nukes. "Winning" constitutes braking it's descent into chaos, and that requires firm, and consistent, diplomatic engagement. Not military.
4
This war is not winnable. Never was and never will be. We reacted in typical manner, assuming our weapons and tactical superiority would lead to a smashing victory. Little thought about the mindset of the enemy, the history of conflict in this area of the world or the willingness to commit to the realitiy that winning such a war would require a level of inhumanity that the American people and the world could never stomach. Instead we listen to politicians and generals more intent on building up their reputations and resumes then intelligent enough to understand the task they were undertaking and defining for all the true cost that would have to be borne to insure victory. The result is the longest war in our history, the deaths and maiming of so many of our youth for so little of actual value in return. I don't advocate sitting on our hands and accepting the attacks we suffered on 9/11. We should have responded with a realistic strategy to reach realistic goals and then been willing to make the commitment necessary to effect that strategy and reach those goals. We haven't actually done that since WWII and the price we are paying for that folly is of our own making.
5
June 16, 2017
Make America great again for the Republican party and second great for the Democratic party. Okay less greater for the Sanders independent developmental party. So let's
Afghanistan great again?
Or just great, but then again; no one on the planet knows what it means for an Islamic nation Republic to be great except theocratic - so exactly what Trump’s message is to the Afghan people is problematic , except for the containment of international drug industry, as well as eliminating hysterical Koranic domination delusion.
Conclusion wha’is the commanding operational international endeavor strategy playbook and as we know the commitment is for this program to go forward to collectively for a decade or more; as in signed cooperative agreements. As well President Trump may want to visit the Afg/ Pak theater and give a first hand discourse on how the playbook is envisioned for all in the gamesmanship for the greater vision for collective success - and then bring in the military and economics to develop the goals for sharing with the American people and as well all other greater interest like NATO and the moderate Islamic states that contribute manpower and dollars to the proper achievable ends- that must be noted will go well beyond what would not be just a Republican administration when we are talking generational decades for the pursuit of happiness and divine greatest here, there, and In the mind of divine imaginations.
jja Manhattan, N.Y.
Make America great again for the Republican party and second great for the Democratic party. Okay less greater for the Sanders independent developmental party. So let's
Afghanistan great again?
Or just great, but then again; no one on the planet knows what it means for an Islamic nation Republic to be great except theocratic - so exactly what Trump’s message is to the Afghan people is problematic , except for the containment of international drug industry, as well as eliminating hysterical Koranic domination delusion.
Conclusion wha’is the commanding operational international endeavor strategy playbook and as we know the commitment is for this program to go forward to collectively for a decade or more; as in signed cooperative agreements. As well President Trump may want to visit the Afg/ Pak theater and give a first hand discourse on how the playbook is envisioned for all in the gamesmanship for the greater vision for collective success - and then bring in the military and economics to develop the goals for sharing with the American people and as well all other greater interest like NATO and the moderate Islamic states that contribute manpower and dollars to the proper achievable ends- that must be noted will go well beyond what would not be just a Republican administration when we are talking generational decades for the pursuit of happiness and divine greatest here, there, and In the mind of divine imaginations.
jja Manhattan, N.Y.
2
Like every aspect of government, Trump is in way over his head. The former reality TV personage was good at faking the tough guy who could get things done. Or being the brilliant business entrepreneur with the secret solutions to our overseas problems. But he's nothing more than a huckster with small but active thumbs. He's capable of tearing things down, mostly the vestiges of Obama's legacy, but his only real accomplishments are likely to be monetizing the presidency and doing almost everything on Putin's foreign policy wish list. Let's hope the culmination of this national nightmare is Trump's imminent impeachment and prompt resignation.
6
"He has no idea what he thinks or where he is headed." Exactly! And he's President of The United States! I think it's about time that Major League Baseball adds something else to that patronizing rendition of G-d Bless America during the seventh inning stretch! How about G-d Save America?!
3
A day of infamy. Trump washes his hands of Afghanistan and turns it over to the Generals, of whom he repeatedly said, he knew more. So now after 5 months and his wonderful advice, he's bored and that means he can simply walk away, declare bankruptcy and move on. The only solution to the Afghan problem is to GET OUT OF AFGHANISTAN NOW. Make America great again? Five months later and we're the laughing stock because of the antics of our dear leader. What have we done? We're like a guy who wakes up one morning and realizes he had just been swindled out of his life's savings the day before.
7
"Once again unto the breach dear friends...................." Afghanistan is not a nation that can be ruled from the center. It is a congregation of opposing tribes. This war was lost over a decade go and because the military and foreign policy establishments of the United States are stupid beyond human belief the beat goes on.
5
There we go again: another "surge" in Afghanistan, with the usual rationale -- bring the local army up to snuff, mount counter-insurgency raids, force a negotiation, seize the momentum. We've been trying to do the same things for the same reasons for 16 years. How has it worked out for us? The Pentagon can't solve this problem, because they can't own up to their own failures. Only civilian leadership can take a reasoned view. But that's too much work for thew laziest President in US history. So we drift on for more years in Afghanistan and more American troops die -- because lazy old men in Washington can't admit their mistakes.
3
It's far worse: nobody understands that these ARE mistakes.
Withdraw from Afghanistan. You cannot win a religious, fractious war that has been going on for centuries.
5
"Once again unto the breach dear friends..............." Afghanistan is not a country. It is a congregation of tribes that cannot be controlled from the center. This war was lost over a decade ago but because the military and foreign policy establishments of the United States are stupid beyond human belief the beat goes on.
2
the Problems our stupid so called leaders got us into a war we should never been in, too stupid to know or learn the history of Afganland, it not a county and will never be. We fail to learn why this land is called a country and the stupid British attempts to do so.
With so many other countries that surround this land, there will never be peace nor do they want this land to become a country. Iran and Pakistan then throw in Russia and it satellite countries and China, none of them want America there.
Cut our loose this land offer to threat to us or world peace. We would be better serve to put one war ship that send 20 cruise missiles when needed, but this land is not worth one more american life
With so many other countries that surround this land, there will never be peace nor do they want this land to become a country. Iran and Pakistan then throw in Russia and it satellite countries and China, none of them want America there.
Cut our loose this land offer to threat to us or world peace. We would be better serve to put one war ship that send 20 cruise missiles when needed, but this land is not worth one more american life
1
Considering all the troops the US has in bases spread around the world, how is Afghanistan really any different, other than name only anymore? It's a war only as we keep calling it one. Or if war is defined by troop locations, Korea, WW2 or Gulf War 1 & 2 never ended then, did they?
No, New York Times Editorial Board, Afghanistan is YOUR war and always will be. You've been the self-appointed cheerleaders all along.
5
There is heavy, substantial irony becoming more evident and spreading almost like a virus in this administration. At the top, there is neither the knowledge, experience nor ability to learn (as in "quick study") the multitude of complex challenges facing President Trump, and all new presidents. As with all presidents, as well, even in the best of times he/she must surround take immediate steps to surround one's self with people of the highest intelligence and proven performance to whom he can delegate these important tasks. Mattis is the "poster boy" for this kind of person, but like Tillerson and other top picks who are applauded as competent (certainly not all), neither has even the modest complement of staff below him to adequate carry out their job, much less manage the situation. Irony? Here it is. Where the need is likely the greatest in modern times to adequately and competently put these needed staff in place - for these chosen leaders, we have a person in charge, president Trump, who seems unable or unwilling to perform this crucial function.
2
Of all of us elligible US voters, 48% sat out the future of our country. Yeah! Proud to be Americans, are you? Then there was the 24% who decided our nation deserved an incompetent fool as the leader of our national destiny.
So, you, 72% of adult US citizens, deserve exactly what you asked for. I
don´t want to live surrounded by you and am already on the other side of the Atlantic, for good. Your children and grandchildren will pay the price and bear the weight of your astounding intelectual laziness.
So, you, 72% of adult US citizens, deserve exactly what you asked for. I
don´t want to live surrounded by you and am already on the other side of the Atlantic, for good. Your children and grandchildren will pay the price and bear the weight of your astounding intelectual laziness.
2
So he doesn't want to make the decisions about sending troops into combat. That strikes me as a profile in cowardice.
2
I think the gist of the message is that it would be to our advantage as citizens of the United States to have a President who actually knew something about his job, the world, economics or how to conduct a civil conversation.
4
The current administration has wasted its first year, and there are no multi-national diplomatic efforts in sight.
Combined with the impossibility of rooting-out a deeply corrupt power structure in Afghanistan, this myopic focus on a military 'victory' is the true assurance of continual defeat. The civil status of the country is a shambles. Shame on our leaders for paying with our soldiers' blood and our children's inheritance and accepting so little in return. I don't doubt the motives were good, but the outcomes matter most. Over 15 years of impotence, for what?
Combined with the impossibility of rooting-out a deeply corrupt power structure in Afghanistan, this myopic focus on a military 'victory' is the true assurance of continual defeat. The civil status of the country is a shambles. Shame on our leaders for paying with our soldiers' blood and our children's inheritance and accepting so little in return. I don't doubt the motives were good, but the outcomes matter most. Over 15 years of impotence, for what?
31
I don't even trust that the original motives were good, so you are ahead of me.
1
So we the American people can continue to hide behind the blood, sweat and tears of the 0.75% of Americans who have volunteered since 9/11/01 to wear an American military while singing the American National Anthem at sporting events and yelling USA and proclaiming that we support our troops.
2
i have heard about needing time to train Afghanistans so that they can defend their own government, citizens, etc. children born when we first went into that country are now about old enough to fight if they choose to do so. if the citizens of that country do not care about their own government then why should we care so much that we send our own citizens over there to get killed or wounded? i simply do not get it. as usual "follow the money" is still the determinative factor. who gets the money? besides our military having to spend money for troops and equipment, how much goes to non american people and companies and to american companies and people? how much is paid under the table in cash?
the administration should decide what our policy will be over there. i suggest we leave and not spend one more cent and not waste one more american life.
the administration should decide what our policy will be over there. i suggest we leave and not spend one more cent and not waste one more american life.
3
There is a possibility of up to 4,000 additional troops being sent to Afghanistan. This is not a war that can be won. There always seems to be a holier than thou worship and gratitude for soldiers, and billions thrown at defense. Yet there seems to be no compunction by Trump who is squirming to get out from under his awesome responsibility for American military lives. Then there is Mattis, who has apparently taken up the complete burden of running this war, showing strikingly questionable judgement in wanting to commit more troops to the killing grounds in a country from which the U.S. will inevitably leave bested.
It is an oxymoron to claim respect and gratitude for the American soldier and at the same time commit his or her life to a useless, unwinnable war.
It is an oxymoron to claim respect and gratitude for the American soldier and at the same time commit his or her life to a useless, unwinnable war.
3
Supreme leader's only motivation is to denigrate and obliterate any good Obama did. The Reps and Dems wanted to exit and the Reps always chastised Pres Obama for keeping troops in Afghanistan and now it's going to be increased. He is reckless and just wants to erase the first Black President's legacy. I hope history is truly unkind to Supreme Leader. What's the plan Stan?
3
I pray Congress defunds GWB's war, it seems to be the only way to end the insanity.
2
Taliban say Americans have the watch and we have the time.
They can wait the regime change in Washington. Political leadership has to take control of the strategy. Generals
can't conceive of compromise with Taliban and leave
Afghanistan without securing the victory. After the debacle
in Vietnam the military was gun shy for almost 20 years.
They won't want to repeat that experience. Trump is
not upto the job. He is happy to be called president of
United States and commander in chief. It satisfies his ego.
We will have to wait for the next president to settle
Afghanistan issue.
They can wait the regime change in Washington. Political leadership has to take control of the strategy. Generals
can't conceive of compromise with Taliban and leave
Afghanistan without securing the victory. After the debacle
in Vietnam the military was gun shy for almost 20 years.
They won't want to repeat that experience. Trump is
not upto the job. He is happy to be called president of
United States and commander in chief. It satisfies his ego.
We will have to wait for the next president to settle
Afghanistan issue.
1
"But every time I read the papers
That old feeling comes on;
We're, waist deep in the Big Muddy
And the big fool says to push on."
Pete Seeger 1967
That old feeling comes on;
We're, waist deep in the Big Muddy
And the big fool says to push on."
Pete Seeger 1967
59
The big fools Bush and Obama have been followed by the biggest fool Trump.
1
The expression, "Everything looks like a nail to a carpenter," is equally applicable to members of the military. They are trained to fight. That's their role in life. Hence, the intended civilian oversight, to keep them from prematurely engaging in their preordained function, as non-military solutions are pursued. This oversight is not currently in place as Trump has no experience/interest, and his Secretary of Defense is a former general.
Let's hope that non-military solutions (Dept. of State) have as loud a voice in Trump's hyper-macho world as the military solutions.
Given what we now know (cuts to State, increases to DOD), that doesn't appear to be the case.
Let's hope that non-military solutions (Dept. of State) have as loud a voice in Trump's hyper-macho world as the military solutions.
Given what we now know (cuts to State, increases to DOD), that doesn't appear to be the case.
3
Sending troops into Afghanistan was a fools errand in the first place. That we still have troops there is nothing short of criminal. There never was a thought out strategy of what is known as a conduct of war or an exit strategy. It was more like 'throw the kid in the pool and see what happens, sink or swim'.
4
This is a golden opportunity for Trump to exorcise a few of his demons, particularly those from the draft-dodging chapter of his life, by donning military fatigues and heading to Kabul to lead by example. Not to worry, Jared and Ivanka will take care of all those pesky presidential thingies while he's performing the greatest role of his life.
3
Quote from Tailban, "US has all the watches, we have all the time." We could stay thete for next 100 years and the tailban will still be thete.
5
Obama said Afghanistan was the war we needed to win. Obama increased the number of American troops in Afghanistan and kept that war going for 8 years. Now Trump has to deal with Obama's failure, much as Obama inherited Bush's failures. But now "blame Obama" has as much validity as the "blame Bush" we heard from the Obamabots.
3
To all you lily -livered republicans in Congress and out:
None of you seem to know that our once-proud nation DELIBERATLY set up our government so that our military answered to the non-military. Just as we did everything to avoid hereditary monarchs, we also did everything we could to prevent military despots.
None of you seem to know that our once-proud nation DELIBERATLY set up our government so that our military answered to the non-military. Just as we did everything to avoid hereditary monarchs, we also did everything we could to prevent military despots.
1
Better Mattis than Kuchner.
How did we get to this strange place?
How did we get to this strange place?
3
Whatever isn't Obama's fault will be Mattis's. Makes you wonder how good a tactician the guy his, seeing him let himself get set up like this. He's gambling his career on the difference 5,000 troops can make, and as someone who has been following this conflict for the last 16 years, I can confidently say it's not a good bet. Mattis has many fine qualities, but knowing not to walk into a trap does not appear to be one of them.
4
To the Editors,
Nice try but we had a president who, while campaigning, promised to get us out of the Mid-East. For eight years, both Iraq and Afghanistan were "Mr. Obama's Wars" and under his guidance (He was also "Commander in Chief") the Taliban resurged, Al Qaeda gained new life and the wars dragged on.
Now we have a different "chicken hawk" who, like his two predecessors, has no "skin in the game" nor any "kin in the game". All three were happy to let other Americans do the fighting for them.
From "Mission Accomplished" to "Let Mattis Do It" seems the mantra while American soldiers carry the load. Why, suddenly, does the NYT view Afghanistan differently than it did under the Obama administration? Both administrations seemed to have no real "end in sight" while coverage of the war dwindled in all major news outfits. Three soldiers died there last weekend yet we have daily coverage of a congressman shot near D.C. I guess we all know just who is more "newsworthy", don't we?
Mr. Obama's "draw down" was NOT getting us the hell out of there. Unless Mattis or anyone else can show us how to win in "The Graveyard of Empires", I suggest we squander no more lives anywhere in the region.
Let Mr. Putin have it; the Russians did equally well in their last adventure in the country and, somewhat like us, have no memory of how NOT to fight a war.
Nice try but we had a president who, while campaigning, promised to get us out of the Mid-East. For eight years, both Iraq and Afghanistan were "Mr. Obama's Wars" and under his guidance (He was also "Commander in Chief") the Taliban resurged, Al Qaeda gained new life and the wars dragged on.
Now we have a different "chicken hawk" who, like his two predecessors, has no "skin in the game" nor any "kin in the game". All three were happy to let other Americans do the fighting for them.
From "Mission Accomplished" to "Let Mattis Do It" seems the mantra while American soldiers carry the load. Why, suddenly, does the NYT view Afghanistan differently than it did under the Obama administration? Both administrations seemed to have no real "end in sight" while coverage of the war dwindled in all major news outfits. Three soldiers died there last weekend yet we have daily coverage of a congressman shot near D.C. I guess we all know just who is more "newsworthy", don't we?
Mr. Obama's "draw down" was NOT getting us the hell out of there. Unless Mattis or anyone else can show us how to win in "The Graveyard of Empires", I suggest we squander no more lives anywhere in the region.
Let Mr. Putin have it; the Russians did equally well in their last adventure in the country and, somewhat like us, have no memory of how NOT to fight a war.
5
Frankly, I'm completely stunned by this decision to deploy more troops to that hell-hole. Hard to fathom that Trump won't take the bull by the horns and end this feckless, perpetual war in Afghanistan that even military generals admit is not winnable. The idea that our new Commander in Chief is adopting the same strategy as Obama, who once promised to bring our troops home, then reneged, is utterly disappointing. If Trump truly wants America to be great again, bring our troops home from the Middle East where we've accomplished nothing in this war that's continued for decades.
3
Like VN and all of these wars of choice and supposed importance what exactly does "winning" mean? Both the USSR and US marched into and occupied the capital. Was that a win? Clearly not. What would winning in VN have been? A full frontal assault on Hanoi and occupation thereof? Iraq, we occupied the capital and most of the hinderland. Was that victory/ a win? Don't know because we don't know what winning means. We killed more of their guys than they killed of ours. Metric that makes no sense. Bottom line, we have no national interest in Afghanistan. Let them bury their own dead or soon to be dead.
1
The Middle East is a black hole for American lives and treasure. It's time to get out of all these countries and let the Sunnis and Shiites continue their endless war, now in its 13th century.
If they come here we'll fight them. In the meantime let's care for our own.
If they come here we'll fight them. In the meantime let's care for our own.
3
I was in Afghanistan in 2008-2009. People make the mistake of thinking it's one country. Afghanistan is Pashtuns in the south, Tajiks in the North, Hazaras in the middle.... If you drew a circle around the 17 million Pashtuns in southern Afghanistan and the 24 million Pashtuns in northern Pakistan, and called the 41 million of them Pashtunistan, the war would end. But that will never happen because we continue to believe in the borders drawn by old white English dudes!
86
Amen! The most intelligent post I've seen on the topic.
Thanks to England and France, circa 1919-1920, we have Middle East borders that make no sense, and both the Kurds and the Pashtuns have populations of 20M+, without a homeland. The entire world is still paying for their "issues", 100 years on!
Thanks to England and France, circa 1919-1920, we have Middle East borders that make no sense, and both the Kurds and the Pashtuns have populations of 20M+, without a homeland. The entire world is still paying for their "issues", 100 years on!
4
the English did the same in Iraq, and look what that got us.
I don't think that sending more troops will work. Afghanistan is in war for the last 36 years. Almost two generations has contributed to the war. War has now turned into an industry. Almost every country is settling it's scores with its rival in Afghanistan. Warlords are minting money out of the war. The only feasible country , which can neutralise the situation to some extent seems to be China. They will do it for their own benifits, to ensure the safety of their mega projects of CPEC, and other road and sea links, opening to the world. While US is looking inward, China is planning to go global and sell their products.
Don the treasonous con would best serve his own interests by planning his defection to Russia and abdicate everything else.
4
What an excellent idea!
But wait...where could the TRUMP signs go up?
Oh, of course, another hotel or motel...
But wait...where could the TRUMP signs go up?
Oh, of course, another hotel or motel...
Expecting Trump to critically think about the war in Afghanistan is beyond his intellectual capacity. The whole reason for civilian control of the armed forces is that war is the end result of failed diplomacy. Afghanistan has, and always will be, an insolvable diplomatic problem. Killing every Taliban, or other terrorist group will not solve the problem as this tribal culture is just not going to change. There is no culture there to support a free society that we so desperately want to develop. In fact, aside from Israel, there is NO democracy or free state in the region. I'm afraid that Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the rest of that region will be like a burst appendix that is better left as "walled off" from the rest of the body and only tackled when the threat of overwhelming sepsis of the corpus is approaching. No more dead Americans in Afghanistan. No more dead Americans in Iraq. We didn't win in Vietnam and we won't win here.
1
I have a suspicion that Buck Private Jones has a better idea of how to handle Afghanistan than Señor Trump does. I'm a Navy veteran and I'm VERY glad that I'm not currently active duty!
2
"...at the moment the nation has no idea what he thinks or where he is headed." I would aver that we have a pretty good idea of what he's thinking about everything: "Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump!" etc. I suspect that that's the only "there" that's there in his head. A plausible understanding of the President's speech is simply repeated assertions of self, at different cadences, tenors, and volumes.
About Afghanistan? He's not taking us anywhere in particular. At most, he's strategic direction is to "win." I'm thankful that subordinates are doing most of the work, otherwise we have random military decisions being made over dessert at Mar-A-Lago.
About Afghanistan? He's not taking us anywhere in particular. At most, he's strategic direction is to "win." I'm thankful that subordinates are doing most of the work, otherwise we have random military decisions being made over dessert at Mar-A-Lago.
2
What is terrifyingly real is the possibility that some small group of fanatics will kill a small group of US soldiers (probably in some heinous manner). And Mr.Trump will impulsively give orders to unleash a massive show of American might and 'carpet bomb' Afghanistan into the stone age (as if it wasn't already there).
Creating more terrorists. Sending more of our young men and women into unwinnable wars .. to be killed, maimed and emotionally damaged. Blowing up a few more billions of our hard earned tax dollars. Disgraceful. Sad.
Creating more terrorists. Sending more of our young men and women into unwinnable wars .. to be killed, maimed and emotionally damaged. Blowing up a few more billions of our hard earned tax dollars. Disgraceful. Sad.
1
"We have wasted an enormous amount of blood and treasure in Afghanistan. Their government has zero appreciation. Let's get out!"
Donald J. Trump November 21 2013
NOT my president
Donald J. Trump November 21 2013
NOT my president
1
"...broader issues of improving governance in Kabul, battling corruption, fostering reconciliation with the Taliban and engaging Pakistan and other regional partners."
Can anyone read that sentence and not laugh? Does anyone seriously believe any of those things can happen? As the great American social philosopher Ron White has said" You can't fix stupid!" and the Afghan War is and always has been stupid!
You may not be able to fix stupid, but you can limit the damage by admitting you were stupid and stop doing the stupid thing, but that is one thing the American establishment and the professional politicians will never do: Admit that they were wrong.
We got out of Vietnam and the sky didn't fall, as all the Generals and Politicians warned, why not just get out Afghanistan ?
Can anyone read that sentence and not laugh? Does anyone seriously believe any of those things can happen? As the great American social philosopher Ron White has said" You can't fix stupid!" and the Afghan War is and always has been stupid!
You may not be able to fix stupid, but you can limit the damage by admitting you were stupid and stop doing the stupid thing, but that is one thing the American establishment and the professional politicians will never do: Admit that they were wrong.
We got out of Vietnam and the sky didn't fall, as all the Generals and Politicians warned, why not just get out Afghanistan ?
Pretty cagey move by a guy who "knows more than the generals" And the republican band played on..................
3
With this President, we can only imagine what will happen if there is not immediate success militarily. If the administration starts seeing negative press about lack of success will he call in the generals and say, "you're fired." Then what happens ? Will we see a succession of generals until the press and tv coverage are positive and stoke his ego ?
This is madness with young American lives at stake. Will we ignore history and just keep sending more kids to die in the "graveyard of empires" until the President feels that his narcissism is sated ?
This is madness with young American lives at stake. Will we ignore history and just keep sending more kids to die in the "graveyard of empires" until the President feels that his narcissism is sated ?
1
Image is all important. Guns, tanks, missiles. This is Trump. Diplomacy seems like such an elitist concept.
3
Chaos by a lack of a credible plan to get Afghanistan out of this corrupt morass, as depicted by Trump's immense ignorance, will go on as long as we have an arrogant brute in the White House, one that thrives by improvising, and always seeking scapegoats and distractions to evade responsibility and obscure his own incompetence. Diplomacy and political dexterity have been shorted, purposefully, by glorifying brute force. What a farce, and a calamity, with unforeseen but likely adverse effects, including the waste of talent, blood and treasure, and the opportunity to truly engage (by providing jobs, education, health care, to spread goodwill for a change).
1
Like everything he does or does not do, trump will take great personal credit for, or heap total blame on someone else if something fails...
3
it is ironic that the country that has the best climate to grow the medicine to help with the World's pain, is also the source of so much national pain.
Afghanistan has such national pride they have destroyed many empires just by sitting still. recently they helped immensely with the downfall economically speaking of the Soviet empire. well not to be outdone they will soon add America to that long proud list of losers to the list of failed nations.
in a funny way i would almost bet the Chinese just might wise up and leave that country alone. Geez Louise Alexander The Great was first on that list could tell them all it is a fool's errand.
Afghanistan has such national pride they have destroyed many empires just by sitting still. recently they helped immensely with the downfall economically speaking of the Soviet empire. well not to be outdone they will soon add America to that long proud list of losers to the list of failed nations.
in a funny way i would almost bet the Chinese just might wise up and leave that country alone. Geez Louise Alexander The Great was first on that list could tell them all it is a fool's errand.
2
Let's face is, Trump is definitely not smart enough to deal with the Afghanistan eternal quagmire.
He doesn't even have the interest - let alone the attention span - to learn about it.
So it's probably a good thing that he has delegated the matter - like a coward - to someone else.
He can go back to playing golf and writing tweets - the only two things he apparently knows how to do.
He doesn't even have the interest - let alone the attention span - to learn about it.
So it's probably a good thing that he has delegated the matter - like a coward - to someone else.
He can go back to playing golf and writing tweets - the only two things he apparently knows how to do.
3
Do we have any actual information about the golf?
This can be called willy-nilly military planning. Obviously Trump doesn't care if America spends the next 50 years fighting this no-win war. Are there no lessons taken from the history of this unmanageable country? We have already answered that question.
3
A simpler observation is that Mattis is seeking to put a force on the ground that is significant enough to defend itself and still capable of making targeted strikes. It is not intended to take and hold territory but to make it more difficult for an enemy to hold ground or build out their real estate and influence. Imagine Osama Bin Laden's training camps going unhindered for years. Now you have a strike force just 200+/- miles away combining with surveillance drones... Critical mass is deflated.
American soldiers will die. Even in peace time and in non-hostile environments we lose a certain amount of our forces. And I don't think we are looking for victory any now anywhere in the Middle East. We are just returning to the idea that it is better to fight our enemies on foreign soil even if that just means disrupting their progress towards bringing the war here to the USA. It is a sad world that we live in where we can't realistically expect a peace to come from the sacrifices of our service men and women. But neither can our enemies... so the longest war in our history stumbles along, the peacemakers marginalized by chance and choice,
American soldiers will die. Even in peace time and in non-hostile environments we lose a certain amount of our forces. And I don't think we are looking for victory any now anywhere in the Middle East. We are just returning to the idea that it is better to fight our enemies on foreign soil even if that just means disrupting their progress towards bringing the war here to the USA. It is a sad world that we live in where we can't realistically expect a peace to come from the sacrifices of our service men and women. But neither can our enemies... so the longest war in our history stumbles along, the peacemakers marginalized by chance and choice,
1
Look at what some voters' misunderstanding of a simple word has wrought. All that Faux President Trump has done so far is to make America "grate". Let him abdicate the throne. Doing so would prove at least that he is capable of learning SOMETHING - how wrong this job is for him - TOTALLY!
Trump doesn't understand complex matters and is too lazy to take the time to do so. He is ignorant and intellectually lazy.
3
First, what happened to prez chaos' secret plan? Oh, that's right. There isn't any such plan. Second, I thought the generals were supposed to come up with the plan within 90 days. Um, you all are worried about civilian micromanagement, but you have no plan? Stunning. Third, I am so confused -- now the Taliban are "surging"? I thought we were the "surgers". Remember how "surging" won us the war in Iraq? Yeah. Right. Good luck with that.
5
I have spent the last three summers reading every book I could on our adventure into Afghanistan and yet to find any author---whether an academic, reporter, military personnel, or citizen of the country--who concludes that this war in winnable---in fact, quite the opposite, every author concludes that without a political solution---which will never occur---we will continue to send our young men and women into an unwinnable war. I know no one in the present administration reads anything, but just for the record, we can officially label this conflict as a quagmire.
99
A political solution is inevitable. What, if any, role America will play in any political solution is uncertain and unknown.
1
Actually, several people who actually know what they're talking about, including men like Petreaus and McChrystal, have indicated that Afghanistan is very winnable, and could be completed in less than six months, but it requires the will to tell Pakistan, and anyone else that provides safe shelter to the Taliban, that if they do not solve the problem on their side of the border, we will.
Clearly, our political "leaders" on both sides of the aisle have not learned from Vietnam, or any litany of other historical military examples. If you allow your enemy a safe haven, they will use it, and you will never be able to break their will, which is ultimately what the goal of military action is. You don't kill your enemy until they're all dead; you kill them until the decide the losses are no longer worth the goal, but you'll never get there is the other side can go to their "safe place".
Clearly, our political "leaders" on both sides of the aisle have not learned from Vietnam, or any litany of other historical military examples. If you allow your enemy a safe haven, they will use it, and you will never be able to break their will, which is ultimately what the goal of military action is. You don't kill your enemy until they're all dead; you kill them until the decide the losses are no longer worth the goal, but you'll never get there is the other side can go to their "safe place".
The "Butterfly" president who flits from problem to problem declaring them solved with a stroke of the pen.
Good luck to the straw men who will catch fire with the next bolt from the blue.
That would be you Mr Mattis.
Good luck to the straw men who will catch fire with the next bolt from the blue.
That would be you Mr Mattis.
1
The only thing trump will do well is get people killed.
1
Thank you, Mr. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and all others of the chicken hawk cabal that got us into this obscene war.
6
Quite frankly, I don't want the man with the phony bone spur in his foot making decisions about American men and women going to war. Trump's "condition" to avoid Vietnam sure doesn't keep him from golfing.
At least Mattis understands the costs of war.
This is just one more example of how unfit Trump is for the Oval Office.
At least Mattis understands the costs of war.
This is just one more example of how unfit Trump is for the Oval Office.
3
I think history has clearly shown that there is no "Middle East Solution" for countries outside of that region. We and other countries over the years have attempted to introduce democracy or to be a major player in the policies of several countries in that region. It has never worked and probably never will.
Perhaps our best option is to declare victory and get out--completely out!--and spend our time in conjunction with other countries in the West protecting ourselves from terrorists. After that any problem in the Middle East should be handled by the United Nations, not the United States. Let's take care of our own citizens and not spend billions more trying to peddle influence where we don't have it.
Perhaps our best option is to declare victory and get out--completely out!--and spend our time in conjunction with other countries in the West protecting ourselves from terrorists. After that any problem in the Middle East should be handled by the United Nations, not the United States. Let's take care of our own citizens and not spend billions more trying to peddle influence where we don't have it.
1
I thought he promised to get all the generals together within the first 30 days of his presidency and tell them his secret plan to end the war, because he knew more than all the generals put together on how to do that. Did that happen and he forgot to tweet about it? To brag about it?
6
it's hard to win with a looser in charge.
3
We have had ten years of vibrant open public debate and the war goes on. Endlessly. Perhaps we need a Trump to end it: he may do it for reasons that do not sustain analysis but he may end it out of frustration. So be it. End it for us and let Afghanistan resolve it: they may kill everyone or return to a non-Western culture we do not understand, but it is their's to resolve not ours to meddle.
1
This is why you don't elect a blowhard, egomaniacal, incompetent bully to be President. Thanks Electoral College. You are useless and irrelevant.
4
The trouble with make work schemes for the military is that such schemes must inevitably lead to death and destruction. Obama had the right idea when it came to his generals - listen politely, then turn your attention to those who actually have an idea on how to make this world of ours a better place for all rather than a greater and greater misery for the enemy of the moment (not to mention terrible endless grieving and loneliness for the moms and dads of American 'heroes'.).
4
NO.
This is squarely congress' war. It always has been and always will be. They have the only power to declare war and a declaration of war on '' Terrorism '' is not an end all be all to continue with the carnage. ( across the glove )
Congress, do your job and take responsibility.
This is squarely congress' war. It always has been and always will be. They have the only power to declare war and a declaration of war on '' Terrorism '' is not an end all be all to continue with the carnage. ( across the glove )
Congress, do your job and take responsibility.
1
The war in Afghanistan has long been the Pentagon's baby. C-in-C has to go along to get along. The war is about military careerist opportunities for promotion + hundreds of billions in contracts. It's a business, the ultimate real goals rarely stated: 1) an unhindered pipeline down from the stans to a Pakistan port; 2) a trillion $ in lithium & copper deposits.
1
It would have been better to simply 'buy" the country. Put everyone on payroll. !
3
Do you think for a second President Trump loses sleep over U.S. troops in Afghanistan? I certainly don't ...
3
Can someone please remind me why we're in Afghanistan right now?
Can someone please remind me what good our presence there has done? It's done a lot of good for war merchants, sure.
But I mean for the *country* . . .
Can someone please remind me what good our presence there has done? It's done a lot of good for war merchants, sure.
But I mean for the *country* . . .
2
Yesterday it was noted that the Taliban has reoccupied Tora Bora. So we are right back where we started, fighting over a desolate pile of rocks against a group we founded, funded and armed.
66
not exactly where we started - Bush allowed OBL to skate at tora bora in service to his Saudi owners.
Obama had OBL killed.
Obama had OBL killed.
NOBODY should die in Afghanistan! Period.
In just his first few months of office, Donald Trump has made abundantly
clear what a majority of voters already knew from the election, that he is
unqualified and unfit to be President. For all his missteps and rancid
behavior nothing speaks louder to his lack of leadership ability and
personal cowardice then the “Commander and Chief” delegating authority to
others over life and death decisions concerning our military. This is the
most important and solemn duty of all Presidents, and carries with it the
burden that with every decision some might die and wars might follow. If
you can not bear that burden and take that responsibility then you are not
fit to be President.
This decision is also symbolic of another lie – in a sense the greatest lie
of all – that was made by Trump during the election campaign. He promised
fast and easy victory to the difficult and complex problems of Afghanistan,
Syria, ISIS, North Korea, Iran, South China Sea, Ukraine, and all the other
tinderboxes we face around the world (not to mention all our domestic issues) where American Troops are either in combat or staring at the possibility every day. Of all his boasts that have proven hollow this was perhaps the worst of all and from which the nation may ultimately suffer the greatest price.
Their are lots of names we might call Trump, but perhaps "Coward in Chief" now fits the best.
clear what a majority of voters already knew from the election, that he is
unqualified and unfit to be President. For all his missteps and rancid
behavior nothing speaks louder to his lack of leadership ability and
personal cowardice then the “Commander and Chief” delegating authority to
others over life and death decisions concerning our military. This is the
most important and solemn duty of all Presidents, and carries with it the
burden that with every decision some might die and wars might follow. If
you can not bear that burden and take that responsibility then you are not
fit to be President.
This decision is also symbolic of another lie – in a sense the greatest lie
of all – that was made by Trump during the election campaign. He promised
fast and easy victory to the difficult and complex problems of Afghanistan,
Syria, ISIS, North Korea, Iran, South China Sea, Ukraine, and all the other
tinderboxes we face around the world (not to mention all our domestic issues) where American Troops are either in combat or staring at the possibility every day. Of all his boasts that have proven hollow this was perhaps the worst of all and from which the nation may ultimately suffer the greatest price.
Their are lots of names we might call Trump, but perhaps "Coward in Chief" now fits the best.
4
When we invaded Afghanistan 15 years ago so that girls could go to school, few Americans dreamed that female students would still not be able to matriculate after hundreds of billions of dollars spent and many, many American lives lost! If we cannot accomplish a mission as fundamental to civilization as female education in a foreign land, we should admit defeat and let Afghan girls attend school in the U.S. on a temporary basis, not as "Dreamers." Once they return to their benighted country, they can hopefully explain the value of universal education. Hope that helps!
1
That is a really, really good idea!
Giving Jim Mattis the authority to determine troop levels in Afghanistan is like asking the barber if you need a haircut. The outcome is pre-determined.
2
Nation building prevents war and terrorism. Republicans scoffed at nation building, botched the Iraq occupation, and belatedly discovered that a failed state is a danger to the US and incompetently tried nation building. "Amercia First," that is, letting the rest of the world rot, is the worst thing for America.
Winning in Afghanistan is only possible if you have a clear objective. The Taliban and ISIS have objectives. The US has no idea what they are doing there - never did.
There's nothing better than being led by a "blind guide."
How many more young brave citizens of our country who joined the military
to fight to protect us need to die before we swallow our huge egos and get out?
There is no winning this war. No end. They Afghans need to decide
for themselves that they want to join the 21st century. Is that possible?
I don't know. But enough with the spilling of our nations blood
to try to make right a war that never should have happened.
It was the Saudi's who took down the World Trade Center September 11th,
not the Afghans.
to fight to protect us need to die before we swallow our huge egos and get out?
There is no winning this war. No end. They Afghans need to decide
for themselves that they want to join the 21st century. Is that possible?
I don't know. But enough with the spilling of our nations blood
to try to make right a war that never should have happened.
It was the Saudi's who took down the World Trade Center September 11th,
not the Afghans.
1
A) It's not a war. It's an invasion.
B) It can't be "won" because no one even knows what winning would look like.
C)The generals don't want another embarrassment like Vietnam and figure as long as we are still killing and dying, they don't have to admit defeat.
How the American people allow their blood and treasure to be wasted like this is very, very hard to understand.
B) It can't be "won" because no one even knows what winning would look like.
C)The generals don't want another embarrassment like Vietnam and figure as long as we are still killing and dying, they don't have to admit defeat.
How the American people allow their blood and treasure to be wasted like this is very, very hard to understand.
1
In all recorded history no nation has managed to manage and control the rugged terrain and equally people of Afghanistan. Political leaders, goaded by an arrogant military in the United States, armed with its usual egotistical sense of superiority, and a blind faith belief in American Exceptionalism, of course assumed they were different. They were vastly more intelligent than history's greatest military strategists. Guess what, they're not.
The US is no different than all who have come before them. For all its military might, the most powerful nation in all history cannot and will not be victorious over Afghanistan. Just as a half million American soldiers a half century ago could not beat back a ragtag band of guerillas in black pajamas known as the Vietcong, they will not do so here. When fighting a foe who has nowhere to go, when they are fighting for their piece of turf in the world, their homeland, and have done so against the empires of China, the French, why did the US think things would turn out differently for them? American Exceptionalism, the delusional thinking by yet another empire, believed they were different. Horseradish.
Afghanistan began as Bush's war, became Obama's, and is now Trump's. Like Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Ford, who inherited that long slow slog Vietnam, and could not end it for fear of losing face, so will this trio of American presidents. When will they, we, ever learn? The US is not exceptional.
DD
Manhattan
The US is no different than all who have come before them. For all its military might, the most powerful nation in all history cannot and will not be victorious over Afghanistan. Just as a half million American soldiers a half century ago could not beat back a ragtag band of guerillas in black pajamas known as the Vietcong, they will not do so here. When fighting a foe who has nowhere to go, when they are fighting for their piece of turf in the world, their homeland, and have done so against the empires of China, the French, why did the US think things would turn out differently for them? American Exceptionalism, the delusional thinking by yet another empire, believed they were different. Horseradish.
Afghanistan began as Bush's war, became Obama's, and is now Trump's. Like Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Ford, who inherited that long slow slog Vietnam, and could not end it for fear of losing face, so will this trio of American presidents. When will they, we, ever learn? The US is not exceptional.
DD
Manhattan
3
The buck stops down there.
Declaring by Tweet a victory for Democracy and removing ourselves now from Afghanistan would be a very good idea. We have made more than enough millionaires and Billionaires within the Tribal Communities of that region. Ben Laden , our rational after 911 for initial action in the area was killed while being harbored in nuclear Pakistan . Their interests in the region are obviously not the same as ours. We with a decimated State Department staff might yet attempt to identify the vital interests of our Country and act accordingly. Tweets will not cut it!
C'mon, Mattis, have you no sense of history? Do the words "quagmire" and "Vietnam" have any association for you? How many troops are going to fix Afghanistan, a country that has been in a state of tribal warfare for 2,000 years? Same with Iraq, a country that has seen constant sectarian violence and government coups from the moment it became its own country.
There is no scenario where these two places become happy little min-Americas. And by some statistically impossible miracle they do become stable democracies, it won't be at the barrel of an American's gun. "Buh...buh...buh...what about ISIS?" Our military presence in the region is more a destabilizing force than a stabilizing one. Every civilian we kill as collateral damage creates two more fighters for ISIS, or some other similar group. So what's the real goal here, because I can't see one.
There is no scenario where these two places become happy little min-Americas. And by some statistically impossible miracle they do become stable democracies, it won't be at the barrel of an American's gun. "Buh...buh...buh...what about ISIS?" Our military presence in the region is more a destabilizing force than a stabilizing one. Every civilian we kill as collateral damage creates two more fighters for ISIS, or some other similar group. So what's the real goal here, because I can't see one.
1
It's interesting that "their" fighters and "our" fighters, coming from the same culture and population, achieve such different results, despite all the money we pour into "ours". We ought to ask "Why is this ?"
The British couldn't, the Russians couldn't and they are "next door". Billions and billions of $$, countless men, women and children killed and wounded, for What? Add to that Bush Chaney false war in Iraq creating the vacuum filled by Iran and others.
There's the infrastructure money we needed, there's the tax dollars we needed for schools and medical coverage, thrown into the pit of war.
There's the infrastructure money we needed, there's the tax dollars we needed for schools and medical coverage, thrown into the pit of war.
We are in the third Presidency in charge of the longest active military ingagement in American history, in a place that rightfully earned the sobriquet "graveyard of empires."
In fact, it is more likely that engagement in Afghanistan did more to crumble the Soviet empire than any action we took.
Remember, the Editorial Board liked the idea of invading Afghanistan. In late 2001, it might have made sense as a way to stop Afghanistan from harboring Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. It stopped making sense when the Junior Bush Reign of Error refused more resources with Bin Laden trapped in Tora Bora, and Bin Laden slipped away into putative ally Pakistan. Should have packed it up then and there.
Now Mattis and Trump need to define concrete goals and an exit stategy. That will never happen. 16 years is more than enough to demonstrate our presence as a fool's errand.
In fact, it is more likely that engagement in Afghanistan did more to crumble the Soviet empire than any action we took.
Remember, the Editorial Board liked the idea of invading Afghanistan. In late 2001, it might have made sense as a way to stop Afghanistan from harboring Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. It stopped making sense when the Junior Bush Reign of Error refused more resources with Bin Laden trapped in Tora Bora, and Bin Laden slipped away into putative ally Pakistan. Should have packed it up then and there.
Now Mattis and Trump need to define concrete goals and an exit stategy. That will never happen. 16 years is more than enough to demonstrate our presence as a fool's errand.
1
Really.....Commander-in-chief, the draft dodger-in-chief is more to the point. Heel spurs, oh so sorry I can't serve, but let's go play golf. Has any of his children ever served, I think not, never have and never will. He's planning to send more American men and women into harms way and for what. If he really wants to make America Great Again, he needs to start at home. Just look at the murder and suicide rates in America. The terrorist in the middle east and elsewhere overseas laugh at us everyday and thrill in the joy of what we are doing to ourselves right here at home.
1
A waste of blood and treasure.
Donald J. Trump .....never served in the armed forces....never sacrificed one
day of his life .....in any capacity to defend ....our country....until NOW
Well now Trump is self-aggrandizing as Commander in Chief...whereas
General Mattis is the actual on the job Commander in Chief....
Trump is not a man of honor....Mattis is a man of honor..
Just remember those who really have served...put their lives on the line.
not just received a "title"...
Trump's war....is his own war with himself....and war with trying to
unsuccessfully conquering his out of control ...self love....his narcissim
day of his life .....in any capacity to defend ....our country....until NOW
Well now Trump is self-aggrandizing as Commander in Chief...whereas
General Mattis is the actual on the job Commander in Chief....
Trump is not a man of honor....Mattis is a man of honor..
Just remember those who really have served...put their lives on the line.
not just received a "title"...
Trump's war....is his own war with himself....and war with trying to
unsuccessfully conquering his out of control ...self love....his narcissim
Is this one of those situations he told us about where we'd get so tired of winning we would call and say please we don't want to win anymore?
But then he knew more about this than the generals, remember? Which begs the question, where is all this knowledge and why has he turned it over to Mattis?
But then he knew more about this than the generals, remember? Which begs the question, where is all this knowledge and why has he turned it over to Mattis?
But wait - Lyin' Donnie Trump assured the nation during the campaign that he had a secret plan for defeating terrorism that he'd roll out within seconds of taking office.
Still waiting, Donnie . . .
Still waiting, Donnie . . .
The answer to Afghanistan lies in Pakistan. If the US is serious about ending militancy and terrorism, get to their roots in the Pakistani secret service ISI. If its tentacles are snapped and the army forced to smoke out the Taliban and other gangs, Afghanistan will be safe. As long as the US military needs to invest in Pakistani military, there will be no peace in Afghanistan. US may also seek the help of its new-found confidant Saudi Arabia to tame the Pakistani rogue elements.
Listen to Bob Dylan's song "Masters of War." Exactly my sentiments on all of this.
Afghanistan has been at war for decades. Why do you think that Russia got out? It was THEIR Vietnam. We will NEVER win this "war." It's stupid to keep throwing money, and innocent lives, at it. This IS trump's "war," now. But, he wants to make it anybody else's responsibility.
1
5,000 additional US Troops for training. How many private contractor's are over there, billing out guys at 350K a year for companies like Booz Alan, the company Reality Winner worked for and so many others. This is the ultimate goal to keep the Defense Industrial Complex well fed. All those senior military guys have to retire and get their second job feeding at the Trough.
Imbed the Trump sons and Jared in Afghanistan.That will expedite matters.
They don't call Afghanistan the "graveyard of empires" for nothing.
I haven't heard one convincing argument as to why we are still there.
A fools errand with deadly consequences, Vietnam redux...
I could go on.....
I haven't heard one convincing argument as to why we are still there.
A fools errand with deadly consequences, Vietnam redux...
I could go on.....
Being an "experienced businessman" doesn't prepare you in any way to potentially send people to their deaths. It's not easy or fast or anything like sitting in a golden tower on 5th Avenue....
Time to leave and let them sort out their own futures.
Go to Congress and insist that they either authorize a declaration of war, or in its absence, the President should remove Americans from the battle.
Not our war.
Would you die to preserve the chaos there? Would you feel that the death of a loved child is warranted because they need to be sent into combat in that miserable place?
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
Go to Congress and insist that they either authorize a declaration of war, or in its absence, the President should remove Americans from the battle.
Not our war.
Would you die to preserve the chaos there? Would you feel that the death of a loved child is warranted because they need to be sent into combat in that miserable place?
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
Prior to SecDef James Mattis' confirmation, he needed a special waiver, since he had not left the Marine Corps more than seven years before. And, military men--after some 42 years in The Corps--generally seem to find military solutions!
I remember that we had several hundred Special Forces--"Green Berets"--in South Vietnam in the early 1960s. And then, 3,500 Marines were deployed to the northern part of South Vietnam ("I-Corps") in 1965. But, by the time I arrived "In-Country", in 67-68, the U. S. had just over a half million troops there.
Our superior firepower means nothing when the enemy--yesterday or today--are fighting for a cause, and our forces are just "there!". What makes us think that, a war we have not won in 16 years--at what cost?--is still winnable?
Back in the 1960s, when we bombed North Vietnam, the civilians just made bomb shelters out of the craters. And, at the Paris Peace Signing, a North Vietnamese envoy told Henry Kissing: "Yes, you won the battles, but we won the war."
Might this additional troop deployment to Afghanistan be but one more example of: "Here we go again?"
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
I remember that we had several hundred Special Forces--"Green Berets"--in South Vietnam in the early 1960s. And then, 3,500 Marines were deployed to the northern part of South Vietnam ("I-Corps") in 1965. But, by the time I arrived "In-Country", in 67-68, the U. S. had just over a half million troops there.
Our superior firepower means nothing when the enemy--yesterday or today--are fighting for a cause, and our forces are just "there!". What makes us think that, a war we have not won in 16 years--at what cost?--is still winnable?
Back in the 1960s, when we bombed North Vietnam, the civilians just made bomb shelters out of the craters. And, at the Paris Peace Signing, a North Vietnamese envoy told Henry Kissing: "Yes, you won the battles, but we won the war."
Might this additional troop deployment to Afghanistan be but one more example of: "Here we go again?"
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
Trump inherited Obama's mess all over the world.
I find myself somewhat conflicted. On the one hand, having Trump turn over responsibility for the conduct of military affairs to the the defense secretary and the military completely misunderstands how our government works. On the other hand, it might make it more likely that Mattis and the generals will ignore him altogether when he orders them to do something stupid like nuking Pakistan or Seth Myers.
The first to take credit, however undeserved. The last to take any blame, however deserved.
The sitting president's behavior doesn't deviate from his norm.
The sitting president's behavior doesn't deviate from his norm.
Is it surprising that under Mr. Trump the US is facing a multitude of foreign policy challenges? I don't think so. This was expected and warned by many who saw in Mr. Trump a man consumed by the desire to be the Kaiser with absolutely no appreciation of the gravity of the job or any preparation for it. How the president could be "committed and involved" in producing a comprehensive US plan for Afghanistan, when he hardly reads and asks for everything to be pictorial and spoon-fed to him. Does anyone actually think that Mr. Trump is capable of analyzing the issues surrounding US involvement in Afghanistan and come up with a solution?
At the end, the Afghanistan conflict may prove to be the least of Mr. Trump's problems. Right now the western-backed groups in Syria, enforced by the US and UK special forces, are at the verge of a major combat with forces of Assad, Russian, and Iranians. Clearly, the Iranians will not allow Assad regime to fall, even if it means entering into direct war with the US. They believe that the US is still pushing for regime change in Syria and, once that happens, they would try doing the same in Tehran. Given Mr. Trump's choices for the heads of US military and National Security and his complete alignment with Saudi Arabia and Israel, the Iranians are rightfully concerned. The Russians will not hesitate to enter into such a war on the Iranians side, since they have no desire to see another US-installed regime in their backyard.
At the end, the Afghanistan conflict may prove to be the least of Mr. Trump's problems. Right now the western-backed groups in Syria, enforced by the US and UK special forces, are at the verge of a major combat with forces of Assad, Russian, and Iranians. Clearly, the Iranians will not allow Assad regime to fall, even if it means entering into direct war with the US. They believe that the US is still pushing for regime change in Syria and, once that happens, they would try doing the same in Tehran. Given Mr. Trump's choices for the heads of US military and National Security and his complete alignment with Saudi Arabia and Israel, the Iranians are rightfully concerned. The Russians will not hesitate to enter into such a war on the Iranians side, since they have no desire to see another US-installed regime in their backyard.
1
Notwithstanding Mr. Trump's manifest shortcomings, he was left with a mess by the outgoing Obama administration in places like North Korea, Syria, Iran, Russia, the war with Isis and other hotspots around the world. It would be daunting for any incoming President to handle.
1
We'll probably be there another 11 years making it a grand total of 27 years of war in Afghanistan. Costing more thousands of lives and trillions of dollars, which in the end will completely bankrupt the United States. The end of the U.S. empire is just 11 years away.
2
To further pursue this 16 year old war in Afghanistan is a moral crime.
The war has achieved no lasting benefits for that country or ours.
We should completely leave this medieval and corrupt land now.
No more American blood, treasure, time, and effort should be wasted there.
No more brave young Americans should die in Afghanistan!
The war has achieved no lasting benefits for that country or ours.
We should completely leave this medieval and corrupt land now.
No more American blood, treasure, time, and effort should be wasted there.
No more brave young Americans should die in Afghanistan!
85
We tried total abandonment of Afghanistan once. And the result was 9/11/01.
It is in accord with America's socioeconomic political military educational best interests and values that Afghanistan not be an ethnic sectarian 'medieval and corrupt land'. Otherwise 'American blood, treasure, time and effort' will be misspent again in the American homeland.
No brave Americans should die in America because of Afghanistan.
It is in accord with America's socioeconomic political military educational best interests and values that Afghanistan not be an ethnic sectarian 'medieval and corrupt land'. Otherwise 'American blood, treasure, time and effort' will be misspent again in the American homeland.
No brave Americans should die in America because of Afghanistan.
1
You've clearly never been to Afghanistan, and seen the faces of the girls (and their parents) who get to go to school, or watched poorly-trained interpreters throw themselves into combat situations worthy of a Navy Cross, to save their American friends that are there to protect them from the Taliban.
People like you pay little or no attention to the war, until you see a negative story, but you have NO idea what is really going-on.
The moral crime would be cutting and running, now, when an entire generation has grown-up on the idea that fighting with us and our NATO allies would allow them a nation free of the Taliban. There will be, literally, tens of thousands of murders, the re-subjugation of all women in the nation, and countless other ISIS-like horrors.
Afghanistan IS a corruption-filled cesspool, there is no doubt, and it's version of "democracy" will never look like ours, but to sign-off on murder, rape, and subjugation on a massive scale, and to allow Afghanistan to become the next Libya or Syria, THAT would be the true moral crime.
There seems to be staggering hypocrisy amongst the NYT readers. You say that we should be inclusive, protect the downtrodden, and be a beacon of freedom, and you're cheerleaders when it's "your" guy is doing the invading (Libya) and political interfering (Syria), but you also have no problem turning your back on literally millions of people, and washing your hands of them and their fates, as easily as you change your hair color.
People like you pay little or no attention to the war, until you see a negative story, but you have NO idea what is really going-on.
The moral crime would be cutting and running, now, when an entire generation has grown-up on the idea that fighting with us and our NATO allies would allow them a nation free of the Taliban. There will be, literally, tens of thousands of murders, the re-subjugation of all women in the nation, and countless other ISIS-like horrors.
Afghanistan IS a corruption-filled cesspool, there is no doubt, and it's version of "democracy" will never look like ours, but to sign-off on murder, rape, and subjugation on a massive scale, and to allow Afghanistan to become the next Libya or Syria, THAT would be the true moral crime.
There seems to be staggering hypocrisy amongst the NYT readers. You say that we should be inclusive, protect the downtrodden, and be a beacon of freedom, and you're cheerleaders when it's "your" guy is doing the invading (Libya) and political interfering (Syria), but you also have no problem turning your back on literally millions of people, and washing your hands of them and their fates, as easily as you change your hair color.
Congress ultimately turned off the money tap for large-scale operations and American troops in combat roles in Vietnam.
We now have an "all-volunteer" military. As someone who watched events unfold in Vietnam, and all of America's overseas military adventures since, I have never understood why people continue to sign up knowing they may be sent to Afghanistan or Iraq when our presence in those countries is, and has been, a waste of time and only de-stabilized the Middle East. As individual citizens we also must decide not to lend ourselves to these wars.
We now have an "all-volunteer" military. As someone who watched events unfold in Vietnam, and all of America's overseas military adventures since, I have never understood why people continue to sign up knowing they may be sent to Afghanistan or Iraq when our presence in those countries is, and has been, a waste of time and only de-stabilized the Middle East. As individual citizens we also must decide not to lend ourselves to these wars.
3
After 15 years of war and $682 billion spent we are still looking for a plan. What will the next $682 billion get us?
14
Another Vietnam.
I don't know if it means anything but you might want to research the low ball pay rates that are being offered to the some of contracted intel analysts and the associated turnover, and then combine it with your comment below, especially the first sentence.
"One major hindrance to sound policy making is the fact that there are few experts in place to do the work; many senior national security positions remain unfilled. However capable and respected Mr. Mattis may be, the Pentagon and American military forces cannot alone bring stability, or whatever counts as “winning,” to Afghanistan. To achieve any worthwhile outcome, the president must be committed and involved, as must his entire national security team. So far the Pentagon is running the show, largely by default."
"One major hindrance to sound policy making is the fact that there are few experts in place to do the work; many senior national security positions remain unfilled. However capable and respected Mr. Mattis may be, the Pentagon and American military forces cannot alone bring stability, or whatever counts as “winning,” to Afghanistan. To achieve any worthwhile outcome, the president must be committed and involved, as must his entire national security team. So far the Pentagon is running the show, largely by default."
3
The Pentagon has layers of planners and plans already in place. The DOD is far more prepared for any and all possibilities than the other parts of the federal government.
Were we to quit burning up a hundred billion a year on the Dept. of Education's funding of college liberalism, this war could be paid for already.
You have to admit that once debt service becomes our biggest budget item, whoever's President is going to have to let that department go anyway. Blame it on spendy Barack.
Were we to quit burning up a hundred billion a year on the Dept. of Education's funding of college liberalism, this war could be paid for already.
You have to admit that once debt service becomes our biggest budget item, whoever's President is going to have to let that department go anyway. Blame it on spendy Barack.
During the Vietnam war, my father who was in his 70s at the time said only those of his age should be sent to war. After all, their lives had been mostly lived. Furthermore, they were incapable of fighting past noon. They would soon be seeking a peaceful solution.
12
This unending, and undeclared, war--which neither party has determinedly opposed--is a reliable generator of profits and position for he military-industrial complex. Is it supposed to have some other purpose?
19
"Winning" the war in Afghanistan with 5000 troops or with an increase of 5000 troops is acknowledged to be un-achievable. So neither winning nor not winning can be part of the US policy. What is our policy? None?
Donald Trump said in the campaign with "truthful hyperbole" (lies) that he had a plan for winning against ISIS which presumably includes increasing presence in Afghanistan. He was going to get a plan from his generals within 30 days and take action. His actions? one huge tactical bomb in Afghanistan with its usefulness hidden in secrecy. (The 59 missiles in Syria were not against ISIS.) Still no Afghan strategy.
It is the ultimate of incompetence on the part of the President to delegate POLICY to the military with no Administration direction, which is what he has done.
We sent military to Afghanistan as part of the scheme to minimize the world wide terror system being set up by Al Qaeda. There were terrorist training bases operating with impunity. The terror bases were eliminated and America has attempted to keep Al Qaeda on a defensive position minimizing their ability to export terror. It has long been apparent that destroying and defeating Al Qaeda is beyond our willingness to pursue. A policy of diplomacy with Al Qaeda has been discussed and the possibility of giving them government representation. ISIS is now entering the picture there.
Now we hear the word "winning" as a goal in Afghanistan. The Administration has no clue of what that means.
Donald Trump said in the campaign with "truthful hyperbole" (lies) that he had a plan for winning against ISIS which presumably includes increasing presence in Afghanistan. He was going to get a plan from his generals within 30 days and take action. His actions? one huge tactical bomb in Afghanistan with its usefulness hidden in secrecy. (The 59 missiles in Syria were not against ISIS.) Still no Afghan strategy.
It is the ultimate of incompetence on the part of the President to delegate POLICY to the military with no Administration direction, which is what he has done.
We sent military to Afghanistan as part of the scheme to minimize the world wide terror system being set up by Al Qaeda. There were terrorist training bases operating with impunity. The terror bases were eliminated and America has attempted to keep Al Qaeda on a defensive position minimizing their ability to export terror. It has long been apparent that destroying and defeating Al Qaeda is beyond our willingness to pursue. A policy of diplomacy with Al Qaeda has been discussed and the possibility of giving them government representation. ISIS is now entering the picture there.
Now we hear the word "winning" as a goal in Afghanistan. The Administration has no clue of what that means.
19
It's a "secret" plan. Use caution! The ears have walls!
1
Perhaps we should send our "leaders" to an intensive seminar on the history of Afghanistan. No one has ever been able to subjugate that country for very long. Even if the Taliban and ISIS take over, not unlike us, they will wish that they never set foot in the place. Einstein's comment regarding the definition of insanity certainly seems applicable in this instance.
15
Well, for the Taliban, it's not about "setting foot in the place" - they're from there - for better or worse. Not to say they are the natural authorities, there are plenty of other elements, but they do have a stake in the game.
1
trump would not attend any "history seminar"
1
Point well taken.
Mr Mattis needs to explain the definition of "winning" and how the addition of five thousand more troops to the existing 9800 troops will achieve that. We could not achieve "winning" in 2009 when Obama surged with over 100,000 troops so what is the "strategic Goal" and how are we going to achieve it with less. "We will correct that" is hardly a strategic policy, we need to know "how" otherwise talk is cheap.
7
A general once said: "Nothing is impossible, as long as you're not the one who has to do it."
While our president and his government tries to ignore the situation in Afghanistan, our finest young men and women are putting their lives on the line in a hostile environment.
It seems we haven't learned anything since Vietnam. In that war too, we continued to fight an unwinnable war while the politicians dithered and our troops died. We supported an unpopular government that was riddled with corruption and lacked the support of the people. And we are doing it again.
Everyone agrees that the Afghan war will end only when there is a political settlement with the Taliban. In that case how will 5,000 extra troops help? I believe that we should never go into war unless the entire nation is behind the effort. And that includes a draft with no exemptions except for physical disability (not including bone spurs).
It seems we haven't learned anything since Vietnam. In that war too, we continued to fight an unwinnable war while the politicians dithered and our troops died. We supported an unpopular government that was riddled with corruption and lacked the support of the people. And we are doing it again.
Everyone agrees that the Afghan war will end only when there is a political settlement with the Taliban. In that case how will 5,000 extra troops help? I believe that we should never go into war unless the entire nation is behind the effort. And that includes a draft with no exemptions except for physical disability (not including bone spurs).
19
"A country can wage endless war or it can survive. It cannot do both."
_Sun Tzu
_Sun Tzu
1
The editorial board seems to assume that we need to be battling the Taliban and stabilizing Afghanistan. Why? The editorial board provides no reasons whatsoever to explain why we ought to be spending billions of dollars a month on such projects. The board laments the lack of 'experts', but there have been no shortage of 'experts' for the last disastrous sixteen years. Seems to be a real failure of clear-eyed analysis here; the editorial board is so busy examining trees it doesn't realize it's hopelessly lost in a forest.
5
I don't see this assumption of additional troops at all. The editorial is discussing what the military is seeking to do in Afghanistan. A political settlement with the Taliban but this option is not being explored by President Trump, who has shifted responsibility to Secretary of Defense Mattis. This is a policy discussion, not an argument that 100,000 troops actually need to be deployed.
4
A wilderness of mirrors, more like.
2
Yet another instance of shifting blame, this time from the Trump administration to the NYT.
The Trump doctrine is very simple to understand, it spans the breadth of his presidency. Outsource all difficult decisions. Hijack all the credit whenever outcomes are good. Assign away all the blame whenever outcomes are bad. Responsibility for the messy details surrounding all major initiatives of the Trump administration have been outsourced to congress and his hapless subordinates, while he remains purposely vague about any and all policy details. All he ever says is that any given policy will be "fantastic" or "the best ever". The real "best" and brightest people are now unwilling to sign on to this administration for that very reason. They know their new job title could just as well end up being "professional scapegoat".
37
"To achieve any worthwhile outcome, the president must be committed and involved..." I'm worried about the normalization here. Actually I expect the writers see this as bitter irony, knowing that with this particular president, commitment and involvement would be the worst thing that could happen. But when things are this crazy, we have to try to be open and realistic. We can hope that the military won't do all the damage they are capable of. Maybe something hopeful will actually turn up - probably from some unexpected developments in the region, a new charismatic leader, or a new alignment of elements, who knows? But to look to Trump - well, nothing will come of that.
52
The Afghanistan war is already lost....count the number of our young people who have lost their lives and for what. Last nights evening news on PBS ended with a silent, respectful memorial to 3 young men....all under 30 who just lost their lives "over there". Why can't we emulate the British and the Russians and stop wasting our young people. What are we trying to prove.
21
The three are those whose names are released by Pentagon. Only Lord knows the true number of those who lose their lives each week. And we are only occasionally bothered by the number of innocents on the other side losing their lives.
The article put it very well if 100,000 Troops could not defeat the Taliban what can an additional 5,000 do? The Afghan military is infiltrated with the Taliban, who every once in a while kill their American instructors. How many times must this occur before we decide it’s all an exercise in futility.
11
General Mattis is being set up by the man who 'knows more than the generals'. This will not end well because nothing ends well in Afghanistan. We have been at this for over 15 years after the Russians fought there for over nine. Twenty-five years and no conclusion except that there will be no conclusion (remember our years in Vietnam).
Mattis can develop a plan but it will be to no avail. This is a story with no conclusion except that more American troops will be killed for no purpose.
Mattis can develop a plan but it will be to no avail. This is a story with no conclusion except that more American troops will be killed for no purpose.
20
Aside from WWII, our wars since have been meaningless, profit making, devastating and sacrificial only to those killed or injured. We needed to kill Osama and get out of Afghanistan. Everything since has been a colossal botch.
History shows us since the time of Alexander that Afghanistan cannot be conquered, only "rented".
Until the USA foreign policy understands that we do NOT understand the history and religions of the Middle East and most Asian nations, we will continue to be war mongers who sacrifice our troops and treasure meaninglessly. History continues to repeat itself.
History shows us since the time of Alexander that Afghanistan cannot be conquered, only "rented".
Until the USA foreign policy understands that we do NOT understand the history and religions of the Middle East and most Asian nations, we will continue to be war mongers who sacrifice our troops and treasure meaninglessly. History continues to repeat itself.
25
"History continues to repeat itself."
America has no memory.
America has no memory.
It is just a perpetual money machine for the gargantuan War Industry.
33
There is only one thing to know about Afghanistan: its nickname is "The Graveyard of Empires".
That said, from a realistic standpoint, a prolonged limited ground war in Afghanistan is the stupidest possible enterprise we could undertake. We will never win because we are not willing to invade, occupy, and subjugate the country. Were we to try, the world would not stand for it.
However, from the standpoint of our military/industrial/security/surveillance complex, a prolonged limited ground war in Afghanistan is a gold mine, a gift that keeps on giving.
Afghanistan is just the latest in what is becoming a long line of "corporate" wars, whose only purpose is to enrich certain multi-national companies at the expense of lives that no one cares about too much. It is a shameful, disgusting enterprise, only made possible by the absence of laws that make it possible for companies to enrich themselves through war.
That said, from a realistic standpoint, a prolonged limited ground war in Afghanistan is the stupidest possible enterprise we could undertake. We will never win because we are not willing to invade, occupy, and subjugate the country. Were we to try, the world would not stand for it.
However, from the standpoint of our military/industrial/security/surveillance complex, a prolonged limited ground war in Afghanistan is a gold mine, a gift that keeps on giving.
Afghanistan is just the latest in what is becoming a long line of "corporate" wars, whose only purpose is to enrich certain multi-national companies at the expense of lives that no one cares about too much. It is a shameful, disgusting enterprise, only made possible by the absence of laws that make it possible for companies to enrich themselves through war.
143
Small correction: You mean "the absence of laws that make it impossible..."
We had those during WWII. War profits tax. Not having a war profits tax is one of the great immoralities of our time.
We had those during WWII. War profits tax. Not having a war profits tax is one of the great immoralities of our time.
2
Correction to last sentence: should read "impossible", not "possible".
Tragically true!
2
"I know more than the generals" Donald Trump
We knew what kind of man Donald Trump was and yet he was elected to be POTUS. Mr. Know-It-All apparently knows deep down that he is way out of his sphere of knowledge regarding Afghanistan and as stated is looking for someone to put the blame on. Donald Trump has never taken direct responsibility for any of his words or actions so why would he start now.
Wether Afghanistan or any other matter foreign or domestic, Donald Trump is not capable of being a true leader. Our nation will suffer from his lack of ability.
And those he delegates responsibility to had better think twice. Trump will throw them under the bus if needs be.
The only leadership Trump can summon is at campaign rallies where he leads chants and taunts because that is where he gets his adulation of the masses.
If there is not something in it for HIM, he is not interested.
We knew what kind of man Donald Trump was and yet he was elected to be POTUS. Mr. Know-It-All apparently knows deep down that he is way out of his sphere of knowledge regarding Afghanistan and as stated is looking for someone to put the blame on. Donald Trump has never taken direct responsibility for any of his words or actions so why would he start now.
Wether Afghanistan or any other matter foreign or domestic, Donald Trump is not capable of being a true leader. Our nation will suffer from his lack of ability.
And those he delegates responsibility to had better think twice. Trump will throw them under the bus if needs be.
The only leadership Trump can summon is at campaign rallies where he leads chants and taunts because that is where he gets his adulation of the masses.
If there is not something in it for HIM, he is not interested.
21
"Trump will throw them under the bus if needs be."
At the rate he's going he'll need more buses.
At the rate he's going he'll need more buses.
We need to just get out of Afghanistan. There is no reason to stay. There was really no reason to go in the first place, just Cheney, Rumsfield and the gang wanting a war, any war. America wastes so much money on military, just think what we could do with that money to improve infrastructure (real improvements not just privatizing the air traffic controllers). I have no trouble spending my tax dollars to defend America, but invading other countries thousands of miles away does nothing to keep us safer (it always gets us more enemies), it just enriches the military industrial complex (like the best republican president in my lifetime, Ike, warned in the 1950's). Trump will ruin this like everything else he is touching.
9
1. Who is fighting the war in Afghanistan?
Since 9/11/01 a mere 0.75% of Americans have volunteered to wear the military uniform of any American armed force. Where they have been ground to mental, emotional and physical dust by repeated deployments in ethnic sectarian civil wars than have no military solution. Ever since his paternal German grandfather fled to the United States to avoid criminal prosecution for dodging the German Bavarian military draft no member of the House of Trump has ever been bravely, honorable and patriotic enough to be among them.
The list of leaders who have led their nations to defeat in Afghanistan begins with Alexander the Great goes through Genghis Khan, Queen Victoria, Mikhail Gorbachev from George W. Bush and Barack H. Obama to Donald J.Trump. The Afghans have been winning wars for 2200+ years.
2. What is the war in Afghanistan?
The war in Afghanistan rest in an attempt by the ethnic Pashtun- 50 million people- to create a nation where they are the ruling governing majority. While about 43% of Afghans are Pashtun, most Pashtun live in Pakistan where they are only 15% of Pakistanis. While the Taliban is all Pashtun not all Pashtun are Taliban. Neither the Pashtun nor the Taliban nor Afghanistan attacked America on 9/11/01. Neither the Pashtun nor the Taliban are going anywhere without diplomacy, commerce and humanitarian aid accompanied by a withdrawal of all American troops.
Since 9/11/01 a mere 0.75% of Americans have volunteered to wear the military uniform of any American armed force. Where they have been ground to mental, emotional and physical dust by repeated deployments in ethnic sectarian civil wars than have no military solution. Ever since his paternal German grandfather fled to the United States to avoid criminal prosecution for dodging the German Bavarian military draft no member of the House of Trump has ever been bravely, honorable and patriotic enough to be among them.
The list of leaders who have led their nations to defeat in Afghanistan begins with Alexander the Great goes through Genghis Khan, Queen Victoria, Mikhail Gorbachev from George W. Bush and Barack H. Obama to Donald J.Trump. The Afghans have been winning wars for 2200+ years.
2. What is the war in Afghanistan?
The war in Afghanistan rest in an attempt by the ethnic Pashtun- 50 million people- to create a nation where they are the ruling governing majority. While about 43% of Afghans are Pashtun, most Pashtun live in Pakistan where they are only 15% of Pakistanis. While the Taliban is all Pashtun not all Pashtun are Taliban. Neither the Pashtun nor the Taliban nor Afghanistan attacked America on 9/11/01. Neither the Pashtun nor the Taliban are going anywhere without diplomacy, commerce and humanitarian aid accompanied by a withdrawal of all American troops.
10
The "nation" of Afghanistan never declared war on us or attacked us, since it was not governed by Al Qaeda. Now we remain in that state fighting insurgents who live there; this is also known as a civil war. This civil war has eaten three presidents, 2500 soldiers and tens of Billion$, as well as untold numbers of locals. We're as dumb as the British.
7
Afghanistan why are we there? The original reason was that the Taliban government would not turn Osama Ben Laden over to us except on their terms that he is tried in an Islamic court. So we went after him 15 years ago and threw in the Taliban as well. Now we are training an Afghan army without luster to defend a corrupt unpopular government and now “ Defense Secretary Jim Mattis promised Congress that the Trump administration would hammer out a new strategy for Afghanistan by mid-July to turn around a war that he acknowledged the United States was “not winning.” (Guess he missed that movie about a new winning strategy.) Like the Brits and the Russians lick your wounds and leave. Trump does not carry the prevailing ideological cover of “America’s role” he could say go, but then what would people say? How strange we have become.
1
Would anyone feel better if Trump was making decisions on troop strength? The Secretary of State may be brilliant, but without proper staffing he'd be shooting in the dark. Of course Trump adores the military; they're the only ones who obey orders and are willing to die for him. And he keeps their support by giving them carte blanche out of respect for the fact that he doesn't know what else to do. It's so bad that Trump can't even pretend that he knows what to do, so he admits that and flees from the responsibility.
6
Truman said "the buck stops here."
Trump says "the buck stops there."
Trump says "the buck stops there."
6
Trump is just the latest in a succession of commanders in chief who, despite the realization of the futility of prolonging a war, halfheartedly continue the war effort in which combatants on both sides and innocent civilians are killed and maimed so that they won't have to pay the political price of being called losers. This is not Trump's war anymore than it was Obama's or Bush's war. It is Americans' war because Americans are not protesting or taking to the streets in large numbers. So this unwinnable war in Afghanistan will continue senselessly for the US until one day in the near future when the American troops just fly away in their copters.
2
This is the mushroom presidency: keep
them in the dark. Thus, there is no open discussion about an Afghanistan policy, revised health care plan, Russia connections, the president's tax returns, ad nauseam. This hiding and secrecy from the administration and Congress does not serve the American people. It serves only a few for their own nefarious purposes.
them in the dark. Thus, there is no open discussion about an Afghanistan policy, revised health care plan, Russia connections, the president's tax returns, ad nauseam. This hiding and secrecy from the administration and Congress does not serve the American people. It serves only a few for their own nefarious purposes.
2
it is just that trump cant find afghanistan on the map....
2
"..Pentagon, which is on track to receive a large budget increase this year, is calling the shots — not the State Department, which Mr. Trump’s budget would decimate." are the "Bannon" seeds of our post-Trump constitutional crisis. As we speak, "The Administrative State" is in a death struggle with the authoritarian impulses of the current executive that might well serve as a handy scapegoat for a humiliated military should, as history tells us they will, thimgs go badly in Afghanistan.
Obstruction of justice comes down to he said she said but dereliction of duty is the more serious charge. What does the President say when a parent asks why his child died in this war: "go ask the generals". You don't need a special investigator to prove this failing. My partner asks, "Why in God's name did he run for President? - no qualifications and no interest in doing a job."
2
Mr. Trump's war is with America and Americans.
2
Bring back the draft. That would put an end to endless wars.
147
It would certainly make the public be more attentive to actions of our government and how they impact on us and our fellow countrymen. It would certainly make our representatives be more careful about making decisions for which they must stand in front of their electorate, i.e. "I voted to send your children to war for the purpose of ..............????. What? Can't state the purpose? Then maybe not best to cast that vote in support of boots on the ground.
I lived through Vietnam era as an adult and can say the draft appeared to allow the quick ramping up of that criminal war while few were paying attention.
1
We tried that during the Vietnam war. Rich kids like Trump had their father pony up to find a doctor to give them a medical excuse to be deferred from the draft.
1
Afghanistan is our war. We the people through our constitution required that war be waged to protect American's under emergency conditions, like Pearl harbor, or after careful deliberation and vote of a declaration of war by Congress. Neither has happened here.
Bush pushed through some vague troop deployment authorization on the theory that Bin Laden masterminded the 9/11 attack and that the Taliban either supported him or at least harbored him. So a criminal act became and act of war which, supposedly justified our undeclared war and invasion of Afghanistan. Make sense?
But when Bin Laden was cornered in Tora Bora, instead of pressing the attack our troops were withdrawn so that they could be used in the Iraq invasion. So even the original rational for this war evaporated.
The reason for this unconstitutional war, sketchy at best, was abandoned and instead became a 14 year occupation as various Afghan war lords waged a civil war.
The generals will talk about "seizing the battlefield initiative" and Trump will talk about "greatness" as this madness continues.
The history of Afghanistan is the history of invasions and occupations and eventual withdrawals after occupying armies were bled dry. The Afghans will resit American occupation as they resisted every foreign occupation throughout history and there is no point in playing out this inevitability.
This isn't Trump's war, it is our war and we the people say it's time for it to end!
Bush pushed through some vague troop deployment authorization on the theory that Bin Laden masterminded the 9/11 attack and that the Taliban either supported him or at least harbored him. So a criminal act became and act of war which, supposedly justified our undeclared war and invasion of Afghanistan. Make sense?
But when Bin Laden was cornered in Tora Bora, instead of pressing the attack our troops were withdrawn so that they could be used in the Iraq invasion. So even the original rational for this war evaporated.
The reason for this unconstitutional war, sketchy at best, was abandoned and instead became a 14 year occupation as various Afghan war lords waged a civil war.
The generals will talk about "seizing the battlefield initiative" and Trump will talk about "greatness" as this madness continues.
The history of Afghanistan is the history of invasions and occupations and eventual withdrawals after occupying armies were bled dry. The Afghans will resit American occupation as they resisted every foreign occupation throughout history and there is no point in playing out this inevitability.
This isn't Trump's war, it is our war and we the people say it's time for it to end!
3
The only things in America that Trump wants to make First are Trump corporate profits. And he his reluctance to make life and death decisions as commander in chief is obvious. If things go well he is quick to take credit. If things go badly he blames someone else.
1
Oh, this is rich. Obama & the NYT was blaming everything on Bush up to his second term, now 6 months into Trump's term, Afghanistan is his war? Please don't assume that all of us have the attention span of a gnat that seems to be the case for those inside the Beltway. Some of us actually do keep track of things and demand accountability.
1
Excellent article here, though I have one quibble: You will never be able to "cut a deal" with the Taliban. Ain't gonna happen, ever. This graveyard of empires will swallow up yet more US military personnel, and nothing will be learned. But the president, the pentagon, the joint chiefs of staff will keep sending cannon fodder to this region, with high hopes and great expectations that derive from sheer fantasy.
I do not know what the answer is to this 16 year war. And I wish somewhere and somehow a magic solution would appear. But what I do know is that we have a moral obligation to our men and women in uniform. As they put their lives in harm's way to protect us, we need to start protecting them. Perhaps, as in Vietnam, we need to call it a day. I personally grieve for our soldiers who die there or are injured for life either bodily or psychologically. As a nation, it's time to make a choice....an unwinnable war or the future leaders of our country?
1
Only the NY Times would, on the same day, complain about Trump not listening to his advisors and simultaneously complain about him delegating a complex problem to the cabinet member best equipped to deal with it.
" Mr. Trump, Afghanistan Is Your War Now." Is time for the NYT Editorial Board to think out of the box and in sync with progressive Americans.
The headline above -- a leftover thinking from the cold war years -- is one reason why millions of Americans voted for Donald Trump.
The educated American middle class is sick and tired of political leaders keeping the country in a permanent state of morally wrong and costly wineless wars.
Left alone, the Islamic State jihadists in Afghan territory will easily be defeat by the Taliban which, incidentally, never expressed the intention of harming the US homeland.
The headline above -- a leftover thinking from the cold war years -- is one reason why millions of Americans voted for Donald Trump.
The educated American middle class is sick and tired of political leaders keeping the country in a permanent state of morally wrong and costly wineless wars.
Left alone, the Islamic State jihadists in Afghan territory will easily be defeat by the Taliban which, incidentally, never expressed the intention of harming the US homeland.
1
It is time we declared victory and went home! Isn't 16 years long enough. the government we support is one of the most corrupt in the world. The cash crop is opium. Who cares who wins their civil war. Is has nothing to do with protecting America. No more American lives should be wasted on this conflict!
April 23, 1975, President Gerald Ford announced the Vietnam War was “finished as far as America is concerned.” I have in my minds eye the famous photograph taken April 29, 1975 of the last helicopter leaving Saigon.
Over 42. years later and we have learned absolutely nothing.
Over 42. years later and we have learned absolutely nothing.
1
Who knew the war in Afghanistan could be so complicated?
The president pledged to fight Isis and he is doing exactly what he said he would do. He has just sent more troops per report. Unlike Obama (who was an empty suit and wanted to keep status quo); we can expect results for a change. How refreshing; a president who does something and works for the benefit of the U.S.
3
Are you seriously suggesting that we will see positive results in Afghanistan if we send 5,000 more troops there? We'll see more American deaths, expend more American resources, and nothing good will come of it, there or here.
1
Jan,
Taliban is a nationalist insurgency, and the Taliban have been fighting hard against ISIS, as well as the Afghan government. Thus, our fighting the Taliban defeats our purpose of fighting ISIS. That is one reason why there is a regional push for reconciliation with the Taliban. Besides, didn't you read the article: we had 100 K soldiers in Afghanistan and it didn't make a difference in key US goals: stabilizing the Afghan government, fighting pervasive corruption of the Afghan state, including corruption and awful governance in the military, and especially the Afghan police, the pervasiveness blanket of the drug economy over the Afghan state, Pakistan's support for Afghan Taliban. Why and how would 5K soldiers make a difference, when none of these policy issues key to the success of any military deployment have set aside. Given this complex situation in which, how would 5 K additional troops help, and how would fighting the Taliban help the fight with ISIS? After all factions of the Taliban are fighting fiercely ISIS, as evidenced by Mullah Nasrullah's assault on ISIS in Paktika.
Trump owes it to the troops to be deployed and their families as to what the political, policy strategy is. Once that is done, sure one can give the military free hand to execute, but Trump put the cart before the horse, and that is unfortunate.
Taliban is a nationalist insurgency, and the Taliban have been fighting hard against ISIS, as well as the Afghan government. Thus, our fighting the Taliban defeats our purpose of fighting ISIS. That is one reason why there is a regional push for reconciliation with the Taliban. Besides, didn't you read the article: we had 100 K soldiers in Afghanistan and it didn't make a difference in key US goals: stabilizing the Afghan government, fighting pervasive corruption of the Afghan state, including corruption and awful governance in the military, and especially the Afghan police, the pervasiveness blanket of the drug economy over the Afghan state, Pakistan's support for Afghan Taliban. Why and how would 5K soldiers make a difference, when none of these policy issues key to the success of any military deployment have set aside. Given this complex situation in which, how would 5 K additional troops help, and how would fighting the Taliban help the fight with ISIS? After all factions of the Taliban are fighting fiercely ISIS, as evidenced by Mullah Nasrullah's assault on ISIS in Paktika.
Trump owes it to the troops to be deployed and their families as to what the political, policy strategy is. Once that is done, sure one can give the military free hand to execute, but Trump put the cart before the horse, and that is unfortunate.
Except that it is primarily the Taliban in Afghanistan, not ISIS. Very different issue.
2
President Obama should have withdrawn our troops after Bin Laden was taken out. There was absolutely no reason to stay there any longer then just as there is no reason to be there now.
81
When America abandoned Afghanistan in the wake of supporting the Afghan war against the Soviet Union al Qaeda was born and the roots of 9/11/01 began. A military withdrawal without a negotiated peace could lead to another 9/11.
1
To Mattis I ask why the surge?? Why are we still there? We should of withdrawn years ago like about 14 years ago. The only reason I see for the US to still be there is to enrich the war machine.
1
Generals for tactics, POTUS for strategy. Trump doesn't know the difference.
1
The NYT in this article relieves Obama of any responsibility for the current state in Afghanistan or what transpired over the past 8 years instead giving Trump, in office for five months - "ownership" and through the Obama years - calling it Bush's war.
NYT also lauds Obama for his unwillingness to listen to his military leaders casting a glowing patina over Obama's choices saying his "micromanaging" of military leaders demonstrated that he was not "subcontracting" his sacred duty when deploying troops.
NYT then castigates Trump for having no government experience and being cowed for the responsibility of sending troops. This is strange given Obama had no military experience and he was the one that brought troops out of Afghanistan.... while Trump, turns to the military for advice on approaches in Afghanistan and is actually deploying troops. So who was really cowed and uninformed?
NYT also lauds Obama for his unwillingness to listen to his military leaders casting a glowing patina over Obama's choices saying his "micromanaging" of military leaders demonstrated that he was not "subcontracting" his sacred duty when deploying troops.
NYT then castigates Trump for having no government experience and being cowed for the responsibility of sending troops. This is strange given Obama had no military experience and he was the one that brought troops out of Afghanistan.... while Trump, turns to the military for advice on approaches in Afghanistan and is actually deploying troops. So who was really cowed and uninformed?
1
Sorry, over the last 15 years, I've forgotten what are goal is in Afghanistan now? Is it still to keep the Taliban from attacking the USA? Is it mineral and resources in the region? Oil? Or is it American arrogance and pride?
1
As a project manager, this would be a dream project - unlimited budget, no defined scope, no definition of deliverables, no timeline, and stakeholders that have no skin in the game. Except for some team members having to travel for long periods of time and possibly get killed, who wouldn't want to be a part of the Afghan Project.
1
One bedrock principle of the Constitution is that leadership of the military will rest in the hands of a civilian, the President. This arrangement is entirely intentional and essential to the character of our democracy. Any public abdication of this Presidential duty is an affront to the Nation.
A President who is too demented to deal with a complex problem should not be in office in the first place.
A President who is too demented to deal with a complex problem should not be in office in the first place.
Do you really want Trump to take command!
Allowing a general to decide troop levels is like allowing a surgeon to decide to cut on you.
As Napoleon said, in response to a Marshall's plea for reinforcements, "They ALWAYS need reinforcements".
As Napoleon said, in response to a Marshall's plea for reinforcements, "They ALWAYS need reinforcements".
1
It's not a good idea for the Pentagon to have carte blanche in Afghanistan but let's be real here. Trump can't add anything to the decision-making anyway.
OK Mr McCain, and anyone else, what's your plan and what makes you think it will work? What one earth makes anyone think that the local warlords, tribal leaders or Taliban are going to stop trying to get and maintain control of as much turf as possible? Why would they stop and start pay homage to a central authority. The US thinks that as soon as the tyrant is taken down, the "freed" citizens will wave flags, put on their Mickey Mouse ears, line up at McDonalds and everything will be democratically peachy.
So what's the plan Mr. McCain? How do you get rid of the bad guys? Remember THEY LIVE THERE, WE DON'T. So who's the invader and why should they stop fighting to secure their homeland from the invaders? I remember a North Vietnamese general asking the same question.
Run your hand through a puddle of water. Just behind your moving the water is gone. But the water quickly return when the hand moves on. So it was in Vietnam, so it is here. The troops sweep through and clear out the enemy. The troops move on and the enemy returns. So what's the plan.
Bush's arrogance got us into this mess and our ego and pride prevents us from admitting failure and walking away.
So WHAT'S YOUR PLAN?? Anyone? I'm a war lord in my little bit of turf. What's you plan to make me stop fighting??
So what's the plan Mr. McCain? How do you get rid of the bad guys? Remember THEY LIVE THERE, WE DON'T. So who's the invader and why should they stop fighting to secure their homeland from the invaders? I remember a North Vietnamese general asking the same question.
Run your hand through a puddle of water. Just behind your moving the water is gone. But the water quickly return when the hand moves on. So it was in Vietnam, so it is here. The troops sweep through and clear out the enemy. The troops move on and the enemy returns. So what's the plan.
Bush's arrogance got us into this mess and our ego and pride prevents us from admitting failure and walking away.
So WHAT'S YOUR PLAN?? Anyone? I'm a war lord in my little bit of turf. What's you plan to make me stop fighting??
What we all are forgetting, when Trump or the Commander-in-Chief by default Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, is considering to increase our troop levels in Afghanistan by 5,000 more troops in addition to 9,800 which we already have there, is that there was no need to invade Afghanistan by crooked Bush in 2001 in the first place.
Thanks to the very late release of the highly classified 28 pages of the 'Congressional Inquiry into 9/11', we now know that it was not the Afghans or the Iraqi govt. led by Saddam who blew up our twin towers in NY or the Pentagon building in Washington or the deliberate downing of another plane in PA on 9/11 but the bunch of highly trained 19 mainly Saudi hijackers who were brought into our country by the Saudi Ambassador and other diplomats from the Saudi Embassy with the full approval of their Royal family to kill thousands of our innocent civilians and our military personnel on 9/11 so that Bush could get an excuse to start a major war to make billions of dollars for himself and all of his crooked cabinet members and other hawkish Republican members of Congress who were also at the pay rolls of the M.I.C.C. or M.I.C.
But what is ironic is that even after the longest war in the history of our country, Trump is still trying to prolong this war of 16 years, which already cost thousands of our brave men and women not for defending our country but to help Presidents like Bush then and Trump now stuff their pockets with billions of ill gotten dollars.
Thanks to the very late release of the highly classified 28 pages of the 'Congressional Inquiry into 9/11', we now know that it was not the Afghans or the Iraqi govt. led by Saddam who blew up our twin towers in NY or the Pentagon building in Washington or the deliberate downing of another plane in PA on 9/11 but the bunch of highly trained 19 mainly Saudi hijackers who were brought into our country by the Saudi Ambassador and other diplomats from the Saudi Embassy with the full approval of their Royal family to kill thousands of our innocent civilians and our military personnel on 9/11 so that Bush could get an excuse to start a major war to make billions of dollars for himself and all of his crooked cabinet members and other hawkish Republican members of Congress who were also at the pay rolls of the M.I.C.C. or M.I.C.
But what is ironic is that even after the longest war in the history of our country, Trump is still trying to prolong this war of 16 years, which already cost thousands of our brave men and women not for defending our country but to help Presidents like Bush then and Trump now stuff their pockets with billions of ill gotten dollars.
Let see. President Trump, a man whose proven view of life is that of a series of tactical transactions, has dumped the Afghan problem on Defense Secretary Mattis, who in turn has acknowledged to Congress that the United States-led coalition is “not winning” there….after trillions of dollars, nearly 17 years of kinetic engagement, and the tragic loss of too many American service people.
Meanwhile in our complex world, fires burn unattended elsewhere and longstanding allies begin to doubt the efficacy of American leadership.
So, one must wonder, does this situation not scream for a coherent and effective national security strategy? And, if so, is the Trump administration actually capable of producing it?
We shall see.
Meanwhile in our complex world, fires burn unattended elsewhere and longstanding allies begin to doubt the efficacy of American leadership.
So, one must wonder, does this situation not scream for a coherent and effective national security strategy? And, if so, is the Trump administration actually capable of producing it?
We shall see.
4
"One major hindrance to sound policy making is the fact that there are few experts in place to do the work; many senior national security positions remain unfilled." The "president" has surrounded himself with "advisers" selected by the size of their financial contributions and their personal loyalty to HIM. Few, if any, are experts who actually have the experience and/or knowledge to "advise".
7
"It is what to do about America’s longest war. That is, at bottom, Mr. Trump’s responsibility, and at the moment the nation has no idea what he thinks or where he is headed."
Correct. We have no idea IF he thinks when he utters certain statements. It's easy to withdraw from a treaty. It's easy to castigate our allies to the point where they turn away from us. It's easy to complain about being the world's policeman until something happens that affects us and our interests directly and in a dangerous way. Afghanistan has been a problem for the Russians, for us, and for the Afghanis themselves. We aren't going to turn Afghanistan into a democracy. That's not our job. Bush failed to use the good will America had after 9/11 to involve our allies, to plan for after the war, and thus enmeshed in a war that has continued for way too long at the cost of too many lives on all sides.
Trump, with his inability to pay attention to anything unless he is at its center, will not solve the problems. By not having the staff in the State Department and allowing the Pentagon to call the decisions he's being a coward. It's so much easier to destroy than it is to build a better foundation. If Afghanistan comes under the control of the Taliban for good our poor planning will be to blame.
Correct. We have no idea IF he thinks when he utters certain statements. It's easy to withdraw from a treaty. It's easy to castigate our allies to the point where they turn away from us. It's easy to complain about being the world's policeman until something happens that affects us and our interests directly and in a dangerous way. Afghanistan has been a problem for the Russians, for us, and for the Afghanis themselves. We aren't going to turn Afghanistan into a democracy. That's not our job. Bush failed to use the good will America had after 9/11 to involve our allies, to plan for after the war, and thus enmeshed in a war that has continued for way too long at the cost of too many lives on all sides.
Trump, with his inability to pay attention to anything unless he is at its center, will not solve the problems. By not having the staff in the State Department and allowing the Pentagon to call the decisions he's being a coward. It's so much easier to destroy than it is to build a better foundation. If Afghanistan comes under the control of the Taliban for good our poor planning will be to blame.
10
Come on. Nothing is every Trump's responsibility. Has no one else figured out that pattern?
8
Exactly, a person who never accepts responsibility, never does anything wrong. It's someone else. Afte rall, he's like so smart.
Conventional wars are messy, and unconventional insurgency conflicts are far messier and almost impossible to define in achievable goals. In 2009 newly appointed General Stan MacCrystal requested that newly elected President Obama commit up to 50,000 additional troops to the Afghan conflict. Unsatisfied with the answers to his question of how these troops would be employed, he ordered the very first ever top/down intelligence assessment of every province and district in the country.
The Republicans were quick to criticize the new president for doubting the military leadership, accusing him of "dithering." At the conclusion of the intelligence assessment, Obama agreed to a troop increase on the lower end of MacCrystal's request. In hindsight, it is clear any troop increase would merely prolong the conflict, but not bring it to a successful conclusion.
It is time for the US to acknowledge it is time to leave Afghanistan. We can continue some economic help, but it is up to this traditional, hardened tribal society to sort this out themselves. Afghanistan does not pose an existential threat to our country, nor to our close allies. And, if they want to follow a perverted and inhumane form of religion as their governing principle, then that is their choice to make.
The Republicans were quick to criticize the new president for doubting the military leadership, accusing him of "dithering." At the conclusion of the intelligence assessment, Obama agreed to a troop increase on the lower end of MacCrystal's request. In hindsight, it is clear any troop increase would merely prolong the conflict, but not bring it to a successful conclusion.
It is time for the US to acknowledge it is time to leave Afghanistan. We can continue some economic help, but it is up to this traditional, hardened tribal society to sort this out themselves. Afghanistan does not pose an existential threat to our country, nor to our close allies. And, if they want to follow a perverted and inhumane form of religion as their governing principle, then that is their choice to make.
13
Wow, that didn't take long. For the past 8 years anything that went wrong in Iraq or Afghanistan was "Bush's fault." But less than 6 months into Trump's presidency Obama is off the hook.
2
Obama may be on the hook wrt to the past. but Trump is responsible for the future
Does it really matter who manages this disaster? This war can't be won and everybody knows it. So let's be honest and admit and bring our troops home.
13
I am conflicted. Is it really better for an ill-informed and mentally unstable President to be closely involved in military strategy and specifics? Maybe it's best he stay in his pajamas with his tweeter and send out an occasional nonsensical message.
12
Let's just pick up and leave, nothing changes there. Lives and huge costs aren't worth it, let the Russians have it.....
4
Well, well......another war. More "boots on the ground". More of our children will die in a foreign land fighting an unnecessary war as Congress is safe in its halls and offices. More graves in Arlington. I am very old and served many years in the military, with very few of those years not engaged in a war, a police action, advisors, secret raids and battles. America is a war-monger, no matter how we brag about being peace lovers. And it is hard to forget that we, the United States of America, is the only country to ever use atomic weapons against another country, killing thousands and thousands of innocent civilians. I am glad I am very old.........
12
The war in Afghanistan is meaningless. That was a long gone conclusion. With that belief, former president Obama made the decision to cut down on number of troops based in Afghanistan, and disallow any future deployment in that country.
Whether we like it or not, the US has lost the war and its efforts in Afghanistan. This is because, there are many odds on one side. The corrupt successive governments and the stone age Taliban forces. They are of one mind set, selfish in their thinking and outlook. Their allegiance and loyalty are for themselves. They have no love for the people or for their country.
Whether we call it a war or a mission, the US together with our allies were in Afghanistan to help the people and the country. The majority of the people there do not look at it that way. With many valuable US lives and those of others lost, it is an absolute lost cause. There have been cases of many infiltrators in the Afghan Army, who have turned against the US troops.
With all the billions of dollars spent in the country, it is difficult to know where all this money has gone to. This is a hopeless and blind priority.
We have many issues back home in the US. We just do not know where we stand with our healthcare. This is one item on the list. Instead of making things any worse, pres trump together with the leaders in Congress, the Sec of Defense and Sec of State should draw up a plan to end all US involvement in Afghanistan. Let the people there, decide their future.
Whether we like it or not, the US has lost the war and its efforts in Afghanistan. This is because, there are many odds on one side. The corrupt successive governments and the stone age Taliban forces. They are of one mind set, selfish in their thinking and outlook. Their allegiance and loyalty are for themselves. They have no love for the people or for their country.
Whether we call it a war or a mission, the US together with our allies were in Afghanistan to help the people and the country. The majority of the people there do not look at it that way. With many valuable US lives and those of others lost, it is an absolute lost cause. There have been cases of many infiltrators in the Afghan Army, who have turned against the US troops.
With all the billions of dollars spent in the country, it is difficult to know where all this money has gone to. This is a hopeless and blind priority.
We have many issues back home in the US. We just do not know where we stand with our healthcare. This is one item on the list. Instead of making things any worse, pres trump together with the leaders in Congress, the Sec of Defense and Sec of State should draw up a plan to end all US involvement in Afghanistan. Let the people there, decide their future.
10
"The corrupt successive governments and the stone age Taliban forces. They are of one mind set, selfish in their thinking and outlook. Their allegiance and loyalty are for themselves"
This leaves me speechless (almost). By right, every citizen has his own stake in his own country, and on that basis is fee to choose whichever side he likes. More to the point, what on earth do the US forces think they're there for ? - do they really think they're helping anyone ? (other than uncle Sam)
This leaves me speechless (almost). By right, every citizen has his own stake in his own country, and on that basis is fee to choose whichever side he likes. More to the point, what on earth do the US forces think they're there for ? - do they really think they're helping anyone ? (other than uncle Sam)
If Trump wants to stay out of the decision-making, I think that is terrific.
6
And let the Generals take over? Afghanistan is a loose/loose situation.
Many of the conflicts in the world are fueled by Saudi funded export of the extreme Wahhabi religious beliefs as taught in Saudi funded madrassas and imams. It rejects Western concepts about secularism, democracy, modernism, tolerance, respect for women, and calls for a political order under the command of religious leaders who use force to punish those not in conformity with their interpretation of the Koran and follow Sharia law rather than the secular legal systems of the countries in which they reside.
If we wish to end our wars in Afghanistan and other Muslim countries, the road must travel through Saudi Arabia. Diplomacy, not military force, is the means to this end. An additional 5000 American troops is not enough and is not the answer.
America's interest is the end of Saudi funded terrorism and warfare and the development of a more economically just society in the Middle East that will give young men a dream of a better life in this life rather than a hope for a better life in the next life.
General Mattis is not a diplomat. Rex Tillerson is not a diplomat. Neither are nation builders. Out of 300 million Americans there are people in the State Department and academia who can help to develop strategies to address these issues.
Will anyone listen?
If we wish to end our wars in Afghanistan and other Muslim countries, the road must travel through Saudi Arabia. Diplomacy, not military force, is the means to this end. An additional 5000 American troops is not enough and is not the answer.
America's interest is the end of Saudi funded terrorism and warfare and the development of a more economically just society in the Middle East that will give young men a dream of a better life in this life rather than a hope for a better life in the next life.
General Mattis is not a diplomat. Rex Tillerson is not a diplomat. Neither are nation builders. Out of 300 million Americans there are people in the State Department and academia who can help to develop strategies to address these issues.
Will anyone listen?
13
"Yet, when it comes to the actual life-and-death responsibilities of the commander in chief — overseeing America’s vast war machine and sending men and women into conflict — Mr. Trump seems more like the delegator in chief. "
Given the circumstances, I'd much prefer Mr. Trump delegating his duties to those who actually know what they are talking about. For better or worse, he's President so we need to make the best of it. One of Mr. Obama's shortcomings was not listening to advisors and thinking he knew better than everyone else. Mr. Trump shares many of these same attributes, but at least - in this one circumstance - he's relying on a steadier and more knowledgable hand to guide the situation.
Given the circumstances, I'd much prefer Mr. Trump delegating his duties to those who actually know what they are talking about. For better or worse, he's President so we need to make the best of it. One of Mr. Obama's shortcomings was not listening to advisors and thinking he knew better than everyone else. Mr. Trump shares many of these same attributes, but at least - in this one circumstance - he's relying on a steadier and more knowledgable hand to guide the situation.
3
I think you're missing the point. Sending our soldiers into conflict is not a military decision, it is a political one based on a strategic vision of what we want to accomplish. Simply delegating troop level decisions with the only goal seeming to be to "not lose" is kicking the can down the road. Obama appeared to have made a decision of what we wanted to accomplish, but he reversed himself. Trump will inevitably have to make some sort of decision, too.
1
Because we don't teach History and Geography any more we have raised a couple of generations - members of Congress included - who have no idea where we are in the world or how in the world we got here.
The British fought two wars in Afghanistan: lost - and left.
Russia fought a war in Afghanistan: lost - and left.
We'll lose and leave, too - eventually.
But right now too much money is being made by companies who provide substantial 'campaign contributions' (as I believe such things are now called) to members of the GOP for any decisive action to be taken - just keep that pot simmering.
The British fought two wars in Afghanistan: lost - and left.
Russia fought a war in Afghanistan: lost - and left.
We'll lose and leave, too - eventually.
But right now too much money is being made by companies who provide substantial 'campaign contributions' (as I believe such things are now called) to members of the GOP for any decisive action to be taken - just keep that pot simmering.
31
As an Afghan Vet, its nice to see someone actually talking critically about the war. The question? Why now? Years ago, while we were slogging it out under rosey predictions, it became clear that our leaders had concluded that Afghanistan was a lost effort and our Soldiers, my fellow Soldiers, were dying either for officers to punch their 'combat ticket', or in operations that were almost theatrical, deeply focused on killing, and then total abandonment once the initial attack stopped. Our hands were tied in the face of endemic corruption, local force exploitation and often severe criminality, that rapidly (and very clearly) undermined our strategic efforts - there is no way to build a better state than the Taliban by empowering people even more rapacious and greedy. All of this has been greeted by silence, and even the Times doesn't seem to want to offer badly needed advice - cut our losses and get out. The War, and everything in Afghanistan, has been badly bungled for years. There is no fixing it, there is only delaying the return of the Taliban (and every power in the region is reaching out to the Taliban in acknowledgment of their expected ascension). The writing is on the wall, and has been for some time. The best policy on Afghanistan is an easy one: end it.
303
Right on!
Thank you for your honest honorable brave patriotic service in an ethnic sectarian civil war that did not and does not have a military solution.
But ending it requires diplomacy, commerce and aid to prevent another 9/11/01.
Thank you for your honest honorable brave patriotic service in an ethnic sectarian civil war that did not and does not have a military solution.
But ending it requires diplomacy, commerce and aid to prevent another 9/11/01.
1
Well said. Doubt that Trumpy could identify Afghanistan on a world globe without help from his youngest son.
I am saddened by your story and assessment. Thank you for your sacrifice, going where I do not dare to myself fighting and giving it all despite have or developing strong misgivings. It deeply concerns me that your message is drowned out by the sounds of the military industrial complex planning for their next big thing to feather their nests, at the expense of all of us and the domestic policies that remain under-funded. Thank you.
It's a bit premature to pin the war on Trump. If the result is positive then it's Trump's war. If things go badly then it's Mattis' war. Stay tuned.
5
There is no plan in Afghanistan. There are no plans anywhere in this administration beyond surviving each day. Positions aren't filled. Policies aren't designed. Adding more troops to Afghanistan is going to cost the lives and health of American soldiers for nothing. We can't win there. No one can. It is obscene to continue to send soldiers to fight, to be maimed, or to die in an endless battle. It is also insanity=doing the same thing over and over, yet expecting a different outcome.
15
I have yet to see anyone define what "winning" means in the context of Afghanistan. The same as I never saw anyone define what "winning" would mean in Vietnam. What does it mean?
11
As a combat vet of Vietnam, I agree with the above. The Times says American civilian and military leaders have long agreed that the goal must be a political settlement with the Taliban. But, how realistic is that goal? Is the Taliban going to agree to limit its own extremist views and practices, including repression of Afghan citizens who do not agree with its extremist views? Even if they did make such an agreement, how would it possibly be enforced by the US 6000 miles away?
Funny. I think the same thing about America "winning". Seems I heard that I would be winning so much I would get tired of it under Trump. Waiting.....
"...the well-resourced Pentagon, which is on track to receive a large budget increase this year, is calling the shots — not the State Department, which Mr. Trump’s budget would decimate."
Follow the money. There are no profits for the fat cats in diplomacy. The weapons trade, on the other hand, offers limitless opportunities.
Follow the money. There are no profits for the fat cats in diplomacy. The weapons trade, on the other hand, offers limitless opportunities.
8
What does a 'committed' effort to win in Afghanistan look like? In the hands of the military, probably unlimited civilian casualties. The Taliban may be able to be rooted out of Afghan society [or they may not] but the only way to *try* to achieve it by force is with a brutal disregard for the population. Even then, after the conquerors leave, the Taliban will return. The brutalised survivors will make sure of it, and we'll begin again. That's why Afghanistan's not a military problem.
Our involvement should be limited to establishing and defending high value mining operations as well as controlling refining and removal of the key extracted metals.
We can pay a modest royalty but it really should go towards funding the VA.
We can pay a modest royalty but it really should go towards funding the VA.
1
"Mr. Mattis has acknowledged to Congress that the United States-led coalition is “not winning” in Afghanistan"
That is a good news, even he has acknowledged that US is not winning the war in Afghanistan, even after 16 years. He has to explain now how adding 5000 more troops would make a difference. The major problem in this Afghan war is Pakistan's role. As another article in todays NY Times suggests: " No strategy, even with more troops, will succeed without reducing Pakistan’s support for the Afghan Taliban and the affiliated Haqqani network that is responsible for some of the deadliest attacks against the United States and its partners in Afghanistan.". The United States needs Pakistan to help carry out its Afghan strategy. US has given billions of dollars of military and financial aid to Pakistan but that strategy does not seem to work. Pakistan continues to give safe havens for the Taliban fighters to launch attacks on NATO forces in Afghanistan. So what is the solution? Adding more US troops to be slaughtered in this stupid war is the solution?
That is a good news, even he has acknowledged that US is not winning the war in Afghanistan, even after 16 years. He has to explain now how adding 5000 more troops would make a difference. The major problem in this Afghan war is Pakistan's role. As another article in todays NY Times suggests: " No strategy, even with more troops, will succeed without reducing Pakistan’s support for the Afghan Taliban and the affiliated Haqqani network that is responsible for some of the deadliest attacks against the United States and its partners in Afghanistan.". The United States needs Pakistan to help carry out its Afghan strategy. US has given billions of dollars of military and financial aid to Pakistan but that strategy does not seem to work. Pakistan continues to give safe havens for the Taliban fighters to launch attacks on NATO forces in Afghanistan. So what is the solution? Adding more US troops to be slaughtered in this stupid war is the solution?
6
This is the problem. Once you see Pakistan as a major player, not on our side, you have to see that there is no military solution. I don't think even the neo-cons of the Bush administrations would have pretended to believe that we could invade Pakistan with any success. We have to recognize that the Taliban and their supporters have a permanent place in that region. Not that we have to stop opposing their oppressive behavior, but we have to stop trying to drive them off the face of the earth militarily. We might have been able to do that with Al Qaeda, long ago, if the Bush administration hadn't made some bad decisions, but not now, not with the Taliban.
They say that decades ago, before the Soviets invaded, and we jumped into a proxy war to drive them out by funding the violent Islamist mujahideen, Afghanistan wasn't a bad place at all. If only we could focus our efforts on trying to find the traces of that old decent society, and direct all our diplomatic efforts there.
They say that decades ago, before the Soviets invaded, and we jumped into a proxy war to drive them out by funding the violent Islamist mujahideen, Afghanistan wasn't a bad place at all. If only we could focus our efforts on trying to find the traces of that old decent society, and direct all our diplomatic efforts there.
2
We won the war there in 2003. Then Republicans invaded Iraq and diverted the resources needed to stabilize the country and leave it a functional nation.
1
I agree with other comments here that we are better off with Him delegating decisions to real competent people in government. Have vice president oversee some of these decisions and take responsibility for them. Trump will have to answer pointed questions during the next presidential election cycle.
Afganistan will continue to me a mess if there is no security there and I suppose we provide the security for whatever structure there is. Otherwise we will see tribalism, ISIS, and training ground for future terrorism. But now please remember this lesson: if you wage a war in a foreign country, you will likely have to stay there for DECADES. If you leave, it falls. Like Vietnam. If you stay, then be ready to stay for long time like Japan, Germany. Its amazing how naiive Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld were.
Afganistan will continue to me a mess if there is no security there and I suppose we provide the security for whatever structure there is. Otherwise we will see tribalism, ISIS, and training ground for future terrorism. But now please remember this lesson: if you wage a war in a foreign country, you will likely have to stay there for DECADES. If you leave, it falls. Like Vietnam. If you stay, then be ready to stay for long time like Japan, Germany. Its amazing how naiive Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld were.
This piece is accurate and exceptionally timely in many respects. Clearly, we have a president who is a mere Monday morning armchair CINC. That's dangerous in and of itself but, equally clearly, we don't have a stated achievable goal or end-state. A "political settlement with the Taliban" is not an end-state. If that were true, having fought the Taliban while seemingly unable to create an Afghanistan nation-state, all our previous efforts would be for naught. We should be informed by those who equate the Afghanistan "conflict" with our Vietnam experience.
3
As in economics, it is critical in military strategy to avoid the trap of "sunk costs". In considering the next step in the Afghan war, we should consider all future options from this point forward, irrespective of past investments of blood and treasure. This is not to cheapen the lives already lost in the conflict, but rather to ensure that tomorrows' sons and daughters are not thrown away in an effort to salvage some legacy for their lost forefathers.
How long are we going to stay in Afghanistan? The progress has been dismal. Each life lost there is a tragedy. Isn't it time we review the whole America at War scenario and reassess what is in the best interests of the globe? We have been at war for 16 years! And, the President thinks it is inconvenient to develop a strategy and convey it to the American Public. He would rather focus on removing any government office dealing with civil rights, etc., the list goes on and on.
2
"And when you lie wounded on Afghanistan's plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier."
- Rudyard Kipling
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier."
- Rudyard Kipling
178
The Bayards of India .....were adept and bringing some sort of peace between
the different tribes ....found some kind of solution...this the time when
Britain was Building an Empire ; and in India where warfare between tribes
never ceased....the way to peace is building these bridges...tirelessly....
.....and when India divided into factions in 1948; the bridges having been
so tenuously built by Bayards and others...reverted into retribution ....
We need new Bayards....how can be build these bridges once again.
the different tribes ....found some kind of solution...this the time when
Britain was Building an Empire ; and in India where warfare between tribes
never ceased....the way to peace is building these bridges...tirelessly....
.....and when India divided into factions in 1948; the bridges having been
so tenuously built by Bayards and others...reverted into retribution ....
We need new Bayards....how can be build these bridges once again.
Nice to hear from the pathetic white supremacist British Empire perspective of the moral degenerate bigot of Rudyard Kipling.
Since 9/11/01 only 0.75% of Americans have volunteered to go in harm's way in an American military uniform.
How many times have you and yours been among them?
Whose side any God is on in any war is eternal opaque supernatural mystery.
Since 9/11/01 only 0.75% of Americans have volunteered to go in harm's way in an American military uniform.
How many times have you and yours been among them?
Whose side any God is on in any war is eternal opaque supernatural mystery.
1
The 'America First' was a great slogan for Trump's campaign, but it had added benefits. Trump gets to ignore issues he has no idea how to handle, making more time for golf.
10
We are better off with the war decisions delegated to Mattis. At least there will be some thought put into the implications of the decisions on the military, the country, the people who have to do the fighting and the dying.
With Trump the only thought, if it can be called thought, is of the implications of the decision on Himself.... Well, really, skip "the implications" part, just of Himself.
With Trump the only thought, if it can be called thought, is of the implications of the decision on Himself.... Well, really, skip "the implications" part, just of Himself.
6
Yes, Mattis may be the lesser of two evils, yet the article makes a strong point that a military solution has not, and likely will not, materialize. Rather what we can expect from Mattis is a recipe for extended arm sales, deployments, and military budgets. Perpetual war means perpetual fundings once we rise from brass tacks to brass bars.
There is no political settlement with the Taliban short of the Taliban taking over most of Eastern Afghanistan including Kabul. Pakistan is limited in its ability to deal with the problem as well. The best alternative is for us to leave. Even the Russians figured out that Afghanistan is a lost cause. Obama's intentions in Afghanistan were noble. In 2008, he called it the "good war". Unlike GWB, the US largely ignored Iraq beyond mopping up Al Qaeda. Obama instead went big in Afghanistan, and most analysts agree that it has been a failure. Nothing good that we have done shows any sustainability, and it is such a colossal failure that we are now talking about cutting a deal with the Taliban. Trump needs to end our involvement in Afghanistan.
104
Agreed. Obama's greatest fault was his penchant for military adventurism. Liberty in Kabul has been paid for in blood in Helmand and beyond.
1
Pakistan is geographically as limited in its abilities as it is militarily.
There is a significant mountain range between the two that has to be overcome logistically for Pakistan to have anything more than fleeting influence in Afghanistan.
There is a significant mountain range between the two that has to be overcome logistically for Pakistan to have anything more than fleeting influence in Afghanistan.
The Taliban was the government when we got there. The Taliban will be the government after we're gone. We labeled them "insurgents" in order to demonize them, but the only thing they "insurged" against was the corrupt puppet gov't we set up.
1
It is more than obvious from History that armed conflict will do nothing to promote the blessings of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness for the Afghan people. If the United States Marine Corps cannot solve the problem perhaps it is time to send in the Peace Corps.
4
If we were going to gain some control or create order in Afghanistan, (isn't that what we were trying to do?) it would've happened years ago.
It certainly isn't going to happen now that we are leaderless. Under the current administration, I pray that we keep our military engagements extremely limited. Not to make America Great again, but to prevent complete global turmoil.
It certainly isn't going to happen now that we are leaderless. Under the current administration, I pray that we keep our military engagements extremely limited. Not to make America Great again, but to prevent complete global turmoil.
8
Surely you jest. Reconciliation with the Taliban will promote security? The idea is to defeat the enemy not meet for tea. Eight years of failed Potus Obama leading from behind left us with the royal mess we now have. And for the record President Trump did not blame the generals for a failure in Yemen. His five months in office have been a considerable improvement over Obama showing strength in Syria and Afghanistan along with a highly successful meeting in Saudi Arabia with ME leaders. Back off and let the adults handle the problem.
4
That's the problem. There are no adults in the White House. More to the point, Trump's promised plan is non existent and the "proud to be your commander in chief" has decided to leave the commanding to someone else.
7
Your citation of success ignores significant failures. Both short term and long term. it ignores facts and purpose; It rewards appearances when the material conditions have worsened. Your Obama hatred blinds you to evidence of Trump's mistakes.
First: the Saudis funded the 9/11 attack and fund many terrorist groups. They have an extremely oppressive culture against women (who are not allowed to drive and can't attend college without a male guardian's permission). They have used oil as a weapon against the West. Right now they have attacked Yemen and threatened Qatar which hosts the largest US Air Base in the Middle East, where US air missions originate.
Second: the Middle East gathering of wealthy fat cats looking to park money in American real estate will do nothing to end the deaths and destabilization in Syria. Real estate is capital invested without production, so it creates no new or long term jobs.
Despite GOP labels, Obama led from in front! He built global coalitions so the US did not stand alone against terror and his coalitions leveraged economic and political diplomacy. He eliminated significant numbers of leaders by drone strikes.
Unlike Trump, his raids didn't kill American children as Trump's raid in Yemen.
Finally, the civil war in Syria is now a multi-sided proxy war. Trump has offered no plan or strategy to end a war which has created a huge refugee problem for Europe that Trump exacerbates. Adults are not taken in by pomp and appearances!
First: the Saudis funded the 9/11 attack and fund many terrorist groups. They have an extremely oppressive culture against women (who are not allowed to drive and can't attend college without a male guardian's permission). They have used oil as a weapon against the West. Right now they have attacked Yemen and threatened Qatar which hosts the largest US Air Base in the Middle East, where US air missions originate.
Second: the Middle East gathering of wealthy fat cats looking to park money in American real estate will do nothing to end the deaths and destabilization in Syria. Real estate is capital invested without production, so it creates no new or long term jobs.
Despite GOP labels, Obama led from in front! He built global coalitions so the US did not stand alone against terror and his coalitions leveraged economic and political diplomacy. He eliminated significant numbers of leaders by drone strikes.
Unlike Trump, his raids didn't kill American children as Trump's raid in Yemen.
Finally, the civil war in Syria is now a multi-sided proxy war. Trump has offered no plan or strategy to end a war which has created a huge refugee problem for Europe that Trump exacerbates. Adults are not taken in by pomp and appearances!
6
And then there's Qatar. How did the meeting in Saudi solve anything? I think no matter who is in charge, Afghan is a mess that no one can clean up.
Trump wants to reverse all the Obama legacy. Fine. What is our plan now? Hint: Includes everybody. Military, State Department, WHITE HOUSE and Congress.
I completely agree with the Delegator in Chief analysis, our President is too busy tweeting and gets bored easily with military and security briefings. It would take discipline and LOTS of reading to get up to date and be able to make the desitions his job requires.
The President should consider surprising us by doing the right thing and leading our national security strategy holistically.
I completely agree with the Delegator in Chief analysis, our President is too busy tweeting and gets bored easily with military and security briefings. It would take discipline and LOTS of reading to get up to date and be able to make the desitions his job requires.
The President should consider surprising us by doing the right thing and leading our national security strategy holistically.
3
Agreed. Obama read 6-8 single spaced pages daily to keep up on the world. Did he make mistakes? Of course he did, but at least he read and knew what was going on. Trump refuses to read and refuses to listen to reason. Where is Ivanka these days? oh yeah, China factories need attention. god forbid she move her business state-side to promote daddy's slogan.
Why should Afghanistan be different from any other complex issue from which Trump has abdicated responsibilty so he has someone to blame? Health care? Tax reform? Infrastructure?
"I alone" can fix it. "I alone" know how to drain the swamp and make Washington work. This is what we heard over and over during Trump's campaign. But all we have heard since his inauguration is excuses and blame. Who knew it was so hard, that the world was so complex?
"The buck stops here." No, Donald, this doesn't mean dollars.
"I alone" can fix it. "I alone" know how to drain the swamp and make Washington work. This is what we heard over and over during Trump's campaign. But all we have heard since his inauguration is excuses and blame. Who knew it was so hard, that the world was so complex?
"The buck stops here." No, Donald, this doesn't mean dollars.
32
Mr. Trump has two operational modes; Brag or complain. He also has no moral compass, no understanding of how to run government, how to get along with others, nor does he have respect for views other than his own. As a complainer he takes no responsibility for anything that happens within his administration and he attacks and blames others when things go off the rails. As a braggart and boastful commander in chief he denies criticism and twists the truth and facts to suit his myopic, self-destructive actions and point of view. Mr. Trump is not expert or experienced in anything and does not know how to make policy. He shrugs off pubic debate as personal criticism that he defiantly refuses to acknowledge may assist him. We may recall his campaign rhetoric when he declared that Washington is broke and "Only I can fix it."
We knew what was coming when we heard that. Even Republicans shuddered but were too cowed by Trump's bombastic and volatile personality to speak out.
Mr. Trump cannot fix anything. In fact its time that all of us and our remaining leaders speak up and speak out, publicly and privately to tell Trump "You are not governing the nation." The "fixer" needs fixing or removal. The adults in Washington need to take charge.
America needs a president who is a statesman, a civic leader, has a moral compass and respects and encourages his people to engage with him as he formulates policy and exercises control and direction of government. We need an adult in charge.
We knew what was coming when we heard that. Even Republicans shuddered but were too cowed by Trump's bombastic and volatile personality to speak out.
Mr. Trump cannot fix anything. In fact its time that all of us and our remaining leaders speak up and speak out, publicly and privately to tell Trump "You are not governing the nation." The "fixer" needs fixing or removal. The adults in Washington need to take charge.
America needs a president who is a statesman, a civic leader, has a moral compass and respects and encourages his people to engage with him as he formulates policy and exercises control and direction of government. We need an adult in charge.
22
Let's clear something up, there is no such thing as victory in Afghanistan. We will fair no better than any other nation that has tried. And if our generals think there can be victory they are poor students of history and should be out of a job.
25
Well it's certainly no surprise that Trump would delegate such responsibility to someone he could later blame-and-replace. It's his fundamental style, and most essential for someone with such a tiny attention span.
But let me see a show of hands: who has the slightest idea what we're trying to accomplish in Afghanistan? Anyone?
But let me see a show of hands: who has the slightest idea what we're trying to accomplish in Afghanistan? Anyone?
16
Let's ask the English how to solve this problem of Afghanistan. They have had some experience there. The English lost an entire army there. Only one man survived. Afghanistan is a place where democracies fail and will be the graveyard for more military machines.
Just as Mr. Trump cannot shirk responsibility for the Afghan war and push it onto Sec. Mattis, neither can we. The government acts in our name and we have empowered our supposed leaders from GW Bush forward to unleash our military on this region and to grind up our sons and daughters in its maw.
If we are truly "sick of war" in Afghanistan or anywhere else, we need to face our responsibility and vote out those who take the easy path of sending other people's children to die in foreign lands for no definable purpose.
If we are truly "sick of war" in Afghanistan or anywhere else, we need to face our responsibility and vote out those who take the easy path of sending other people's children to die in foreign lands for no definable purpose.
13
It would be nice if Trump followed one of his campaign speeches regarding the "Bush" wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) - we should never have been there. Our military is following mainline bureaucratic thinking: continue doing the same thing you have been doing - regardless of success - since it protects everyone involved. Wars that never stop become wars that generals can claim we have not yet lost. Our military followed this philosophy in Vietnam to the detriment of over 50,000 dead American soldiers. The English and Russians found that Afghanistan is a place where empires go to die. Maybe history should be our guide and not the interests of generals and the defense industry.
9
Here we go again, reinvent the wheel. Why not send twenty thousand troops in? Maybe more - after sixteen odd years, we seem to be chasing our tail and did we not learn anything from the Russian failure there, perhaps not. And then the large elephant in the room looms (i.e., Vietnam) when the Pentagon and the military called the shots and guess what the outcome was. The Taliban, Al Qaeda et al. will slip in and out of Pakistan, Iraq and then emerge to continue their efforts while corrupt unstable governments take our money and look the other way. I'm sorry but it's hard to support more boots on the ground when after sixteen years this has resulted in no permanent resolve to what is a quagmire we or for that matter anyone else can't solve. What about the Middle Eastern commitment Mr. Trump expects and implied would occur in stemming the tide of international terrorism? Don't kid ourselves, the Saudi's and Pakistan, perhaps Turkey and certainly Iran gleefully watch us expend billions while nothing changes. Unless this administration can very quickly and coherently inform the American public about a definitive course of foreign policy action which, by the way, should have State Department involvement then Congress and the Senate should no longer rubber stamp troop increases. Bin Laden has had his way - trillions gone, lives wasted (military, civilian) and business as usual in Afghanistan; to paraphrase ... "The more things change the more they stay the same."
8
President Obama was elected to refrain from getting Americans killed in meaningless wars. He may not have done that job perfectly but he at least recognized the role he was elected for and did his job. Mr. Trump is not thoughtful; his worldview is disorganized without guiding principles or ethical constraint. By failing to provide proper civilian strategic leadership for military involvement and delegating American interests to the military, the outcome can only be failure.
6
After Obama's destructive 'rules of engagement', his dithering labeled as careful contemplation, his White House staff intruding into military decisions and defensiveness about good generals who didn't curry favor with him--- Trumps efforts to strengthen our military and listen to effective men like Mattis is refreshing. Afganistan and Iraq are both still Obama's wars of failed leadership.
1
I have to note that BOTH wars began--and were bungled--by GW Bush. It is possible that something could have been accomplished in Afghanistan had the Bush administration not been so full-throttle determined to start a war in Iraq.
3
Doc Peter, What do you actually know about Secretary Mattis other than what you read about him? Effective leadership on a specific battlefield means nothing outside of that time and place, especially since wherever that battlefield is there is no peace, no stable community. We need to stop romanticizing general officers. Now that the former general is Secretary of Defense, we shall now start to determine whether Bulldog Mattis is the effective man you want him to be.
16 years in country, no end in sight. A corrupt Government, poorly trained Army, no battle plan, no political plan, adjacent Pakistan providing safe haven, and an unfaultering insurgency led by seasoned and hardened Taliban fighters. Sounds like Déjà vu Vietnam to me.
It's unwinable and Mattis and others likely know it. So their in a quandary and don't know how to escape. Trump has no interest, as he does with just about anything that he can't claim immediate victory with. So it's probably good that he stay away from this fiasco. If he were to get involved and started to make decisions, what then? We should all remember this Commander in Chief has nearby an attache with a briefcase, and something inside that has the nuclear launch codes! Isn't that a scary thought?
It's unwinable and Mattis and others likely know it. So their in a quandary and don't know how to escape. Trump has no interest, as he does with just about anything that he can't claim immediate victory with. So it's probably good that he stay away from this fiasco. If he were to get involved and started to make decisions, what then? We should all remember this Commander in Chief has nearby an attache with a briefcase, and something inside that has the nuclear launch codes! Isn't that a scary thought?
4
Never forget that the situation in Afghanistan is more collateral damage from the illegal Bush/Republican invasion of Iraq. We were on course to end Taliban and stabilize the country, but the Republicans had a chub for getting rid of Saddam so the resources were pulled from Afghanistan at a critical point and never fully returned.
To your question, "What is the core American national security interest,,,,?", there should have been another answer choice:
Keeping the military industrial complex happy.
There is no other interest that will be served by the US continuing to fight a losing fight in Afghanistan than that.
Keeping the military industrial complex happy.
There is no other interest that will be served by the US continuing to fight a losing fight in Afghanistan than that.
9
Trump must be waiting for the opportune moment to spring his brilliant plan and show he knows more than all the generals .
3
This troop deployment will be a failure without an overarching foreign policy strategy-and we have none.
It will be a success when we here the Republican leader discuss it though, right up to the point its unmistakably not, and he's caught in yet another lie. And then he'll denigrate the critics, and ultimately conclude by blaming General Mattis, the pattern is clear and unmistakeable.
These tired old reruns of the Republican leader's style are wearisome. a leader he is not-a narcissistic, petulant, vengeful, incompetent, ill-informed, ingrate he is.
Sad American patriots, so sad.
It will be a success when we here the Republican leader discuss it though, right up to the point its unmistakably not, and he's caught in yet another lie. And then he'll denigrate the critics, and ultimately conclude by blaming General Mattis, the pattern is clear and unmistakeable.
These tired old reruns of the Republican leader's style are wearisome. a leader he is not-a narcissistic, petulant, vengeful, incompetent, ill-informed, ingrate he is.
Sad American patriots, so sad.
7
If one asks why Trump is fobbing this off on Sec. Mattis, the editorial offers the quick and true answer, so that he can blame the generals when things don't go well. You know, the generals he assured us knew less about ISIS than he did. The term for leadership that takes credit for other's successes, and sets up others to take the blame or the fall when the leader fails, is toxic. Toxic leadership, in the White House. That's why so many important jobs remain unfilled.
Expect no visionary leadership from this unraveling presidency on the issue of war in Afghanistan. Expect no visionary leadership from a possible Pence caretaker presidency on this issue as well. Neither have the support in the nation to take us anywhere. Either a full pull out or a surge back to six digit numbers has no support at home. Nor anything in between.
Mostly my sense of it is Americans are wise and tired of being sold a pig in a poke by reactionary presidencies that we can somehow 'Win' in Afghanistan. And with large scale respect for our military they are not capable of admitting that there very well be no 'victory' simply because we are there.
Any attempt to 'Nation Build' in Afghanistan is doomed to failure with out at least a fifty year commitment and hundreds of billions of tax payer money.
Contrary to popular believe in the reactionary right we would be just as safe if we left. Reserving the right to intervene at any time should Int'l terrorists set up shop there again. But otherwise letting the Afghanistan's deal with their own complexities. Harsh: yes. But smart for us.
One more thing. Only rarely do we talk about just how deeply involved in this situation are the Pakistanis. They have shown us many times in the last decade or two that they are not our friends here. We need to talk about that in any situation concerning our on going involvement in Afghanistan.
But unfortunately we will probably get none of the above.
Mostly my sense of it is Americans are wise and tired of being sold a pig in a poke by reactionary presidencies that we can somehow 'Win' in Afghanistan. And with large scale respect for our military they are not capable of admitting that there very well be no 'victory' simply because we are there.
Any attempt to 'Nation Build' in Afghanistan is doomed to failure with out at least a fifty year commitment and hundreds of billions of tax payer money.
Contrary to popular believe in the reactionary right we would be just as safe if we left. Reserving the right to intervene at any time should Int'l terrorists set up shop there again. But otherwise letting the Afghanistan's deal with their own complexities. Harsh: yes. But smart for us.
One more thing. Only rarely do we talk about just how deeply involved in this situation are the Pakistanis. They have shown us many times in the last decade or two that they are not our friends here. We need to talk about that in any situation concerning our on going involvement in Afghanistan.
But unfortunately we will probably get none of the above.
7
Not true, the Afgan war belongs to no one. This particular multi-decades civil/religious/sectarian/warlord/poppy/minerals/whatever suits is a struggle of geographic rockpiles, weaponization, pitifully small piles of local cash and maleness/domination of women notwithstanding whatever comes to mind. Sending young people there is an act of political ineptness and all killed and maimed are sacrificial kids too young to understand that they are disposable. Besides, I doubt if Trump's Generals are smart enough to build a laterine in a rockpiles or calculate strategic worn-torn agate.
All Trump is good at is passing the buck when it comes to any real decision (except trying to stop any Russsia related investigations of him and his henchmen). At the same time, he is chasing the buck by officially supporting his own business establishments supposedly in "blind" Trust, as he remains blind to the our country's problems and any real solutions because they are "complicated".
We have a FAKE president, who signs "fake" legislation to claim he has done more than FDR in his first four months.
Sad! And disastrous. Everyday.
We have a FAKE president, who signs "fake" legislation to claim he has done more than FDR in his first four months.
Sad! And disastrous. Everyday.
4
Donald trump and the people surrounding him
are systematically destroying the US.
Democracy, civil rights , environment, healthcare,
education, infrastructure., civil discourse,
voting rights. The list goes on and on.
Did he not promise " everyone is going to be
covered and it's going to be cheaper"
for healthcare? Did he promise to ramp up
military? More war, more killing, more guns in USA,
What is the point of all this? What is the goal,
what are these people trying to achieve
ultimately?
I don't recognize my own country anymore.
are systematically destroying the US.
Democracy, civil rights , environment, healthcare,
education, infrastructure., civil discourse,
voting rights. The list goes on and on.
Did he not promise " everyone is going to be
covered and it's going to be cheaper"
for healthcare? Did he promise to ramp up
military? More war, more killing, more guns in USA,
What is the point of all this? What is the goal,
what are these people trying to achieve
ultimately?
I don't recognize my own country anymore.
4
Obama was smart and responsible enough to not let his generals do his thinking for him. Afghanistan is so obviously unwinable that only a fool would insert more U.S. troops into that conflict. Once again we have a complete Trump contradiction playing out here. The campaigner who promised not to get us involved in any more messy conflicts and who proclaimed he is so much smarter than the generals does exactly the opposite. Now he has Mattis set up as the stooge when body bags once more make their long journey home. And the irony is that Trump's core voters whose children will be the fodder for such a reckless move will cheer him on and a young military who voted overwhelming voted for Trump will proclaim him a decisive leader.
3
Seems I remember Conald Trump saying he would give the generals 60 days from inauguration to come up with a plan against ISIS, and if he didn't like it, he had one. There is no plan. The generals don't have one for ISIS or Afghanistan, Conald doesn't have one, no one ever had one and they never will. (Ok, maybe it's a secret plan.) The "war" in Afghanistan now nears two decades, longer than the Korean conflict, WWI, and WWII combined!Can the greatest military in the world not win a war in a third world country?
Afghanistan is the new Vietnam. We will continue to spend American lives and money there for decades because there is no plan. We ignore the history of other major powers who tried to conquer Afghanistan and failed. At least they had the sense to stop sending their soldiers to die for a lost cause.
Afghanistan is the new Vietnam. We will continue to spend American lives and money there for decades because there is no plan. We ignore the history of other major powers who tried to conquer Afghanistan and failed. At least they had the sense to stop sending their soldiers to die for a lost cause.
3
Remember back in the late 1970s Russia invaded Afghanistan and vowed to own it. Seven years later they left with their tails between their legs.........Afghanistan has been dealing with foreign invaders for thousands of years. Our venture there will soon be finished and forgotten. Only the families of the dead American GIs willl remember......
1
For thousands of years outside forces have failed to win wars in Afghanistan. Countless young men and woman have shed blood in the forsaken land and to what end? How often must history repeat itself before we wise up and take all of our forces out of harms way? That was President Obama's plan and because it was his plan, Trump will need to repudiate it, the same as he is dismantling Obama era progress with healthcare, school nutrition, financial reform, gun control, climate change, Cuban policy and trade policies. When jealousy is your only motivation, things almost always end badly.
5
More troops sent by President Trump (a know-nothing about the military and much more) to Afghanistan, will be more soldiers, more blood in the streets and mountains and redoubts of the Afghanis, and a continuing colossal loss for America. This Middle Eastern war has been America's longest war, bar none. The tide in that country will not be turned by throwing more troops and materiel into that beknighted country. Why do we have to endure more of this horrific battle in the Middle East? Will Al Qeuda, ISIS and the Taliban be defeated and destroyed with only 5,000 more troops and weapons? No. All wars end at the negotiating table, as Richard Holbrooke, a brilliant American State Department diplomat said years ago. This war in Afghanistan is unwinnable, as the British and the Russians discovered, when they left their wars against that country. There are no such things as "walks in the park" and "slam dunks" any longer n the Middle East.
2
Typical Trump, loud bark, poor vision and no desire to accept accountability. I am willing to bet that he has spent most of his life hiding behind any blame that does not include him personally. The man knows nothing about warfare and I seriously doubt he wants to. We elected a clueless dolt to do a job that requires at the very least a responsible person of reason willing and capable of accepting accountability for their actions. Trump runs from accountability, it is bad for the brand.
3
Afghanistan is not Trump's war, he has grudgingly inherited it. It is America's longest war started by the 43rd president of the USA, George W. Bush. Trump can win the peace by not making the same mistakes that Bush and Obama made and that is not to give peace a chance and to stubbornly expect the military to keep winning the war. Over the 16+ years of the Afghan war there were several missed opportunities for a political solution and for smart diplomacy and to prevent Pakistan from obstructing peace in Afghanistan. Trump needs to take a fresh look and come up with a comprehensive permanent resolution to the war in Afghanistan. Too many brave Americans have laid down their lives and too many others have returned with grave physical and mental damage. The costly war in Afghanistan is not sustainable any longer. End the war now.
3
You note the absence of an informed, wide-ranging public debate, and complain that none of the big questions have been answered. But what about the big question of our participation in this awful far off civil war? Why are we repeating history and expecting different results?
1
What is "winning?" Eliminating the Taliban? Eliminating ISIS? Creating a stable self governing country? Creating a stable self governing country that is not based on corruption?
And how exactly can more troops make that happen? Do we have a smart bomb that can identify bad guys and spare good guys? Or do we plan to occupy the region indefinitely?
What is the cost of getting out and staying out and what is the benefit of going in?
The President may have delegated troop levels to Mattis, but he did not delegate the war strategy. You must have a strategy to delegate it. As far I can tell, there has never been a strategy since Bush, unless you count Obama's effort to just get out.
The President owns the war now. But no one has ever owned a viable strategy.
And how exactly can more troops make that happen? Do we have a smart bomb that can identify bad guys and spare good guys? Or do we plan to occupy the region indefinitely?
What is the cost of getting out and staying out and what is the benefit of going in?
The President may have delegated troop levels to Mattis, but he did not delegate the war strategy. You must have a strategy to delegate it. As far I can tell, there has never been a strategy since Bush, unless you count Obama's effort to just get out.
The President owns the war now. But no one has ever owned a viable strategy.
1
This is just one more reason, among many others, that this man should not be allowed to be in office for four years. He's incapable of making any rational decisions regarding the welfare of this country, he's not interested in learning what needs to be done, his attention span is nonexistent, he lives only for the immediate moment, he abdicates responsibility to others when it clearly belongs to him. He is creating a very dangerous atmosphere for the United States, and he's only into the sixth month in office. Destruction follows him everywhere he goes!
1
trump is afraid to put his name on an order sending Americans to war. He has delegated this task so he has someone to throw under the bus if things go wrong. If things go right he can take credit. I guess we are better off this way, if I were a solider I would not want a incompetent person like trump deciding my fate.
3
Why doesn't our "president" who proclaimed for months on the campaign trail about how successful he is as a businessman and negotiator go to Afghanistan and negotiate a swift end to the war. Perhaps he would use that same set of skills that he used for his airline, casinos and university that proved so helpful in the past.
After all, he told us we would be tired of winning....
After all, he told us we would be tired of winning....
2
Going to war is the most profound decision a country can make. There is no ambiguity in the Constitution who has the power to declare war. Article I gives this solemn responsibility to Congress.
Presidents over the years have usurped that responsibility with the complicity of Congress. Congress runs from this responsibility in the same cowardly way our current Commander-in-Chief has (if for different reasons).
Troop levels in Afghanistan are low enough right now to have the needed debate of whether to end it completely or commit. But we need the leadership for that debate: to layout ( as the NYT states) our goals, our plan to achieve, the commensurate cost in loves, money, long term impact on other countries etc.
This is not a “troop level” decision and it certainly is not solely the Pentagon’s.
Where is the leadership?
Presidents over the years have usurped that responsibility with the complicity of Congress. Congress runs from this responsibility in the same cowardly way our current Commander-in-Chief has (if for different reasons).
Troop levels in Afghanistan are low enough right now to have the needed debate of whether to end it completely or commit. But we need the leadership for that debate: to layout ( as the NYT states) our goals, our plan to achieve, the commensurate cost in loves, money, long term impact on other countries etc.
This is not a “troop level” decision and it certainly is not solely the Pentagon’s.
Where is the leadership?
8
Wrong, this is not Mr. Trump's war, this is the American people's war, and one they neither want or need. We are all paying for this unending mess. Unfortunately, the American taxpayer has been footing the bill for this unnecessary military adventure for way too long, as well as many others, while domestic priorities suffer across the board. When will our 'leaders' in Congress step away from their corporate masters and finally offer their constituents something? War and military costs have led to the demise of many empires in history. Maybe we should learn that lesson?
19
There is little doubt that just a couple of months after Trump's new troops set boots on the ground, our "president" will declare that we are now winning the war in Afghanistan. He will add it to his list of super-human accomplishments and his cult members will all nod along.
The thing is, he will be right – if, that is, he means by pronouncing that "we" are winning the "we" is the defense contracting industry.
The thing is, he will be right – if, that is, he means by pronouncing that "we" are winning the "we" is the defense contracting industry.
6
What the British learned in the 19th century and the Russians in the 20th, Afghanistan fends off western militarism quite well. Obama understood that, Trump does not, nor do his generals. I fear U.S. Presence will remain until after President Elizabeth Warren takes the oath.
7
We can't win in Afghanistan because there is nothing there to win. There is no military solution. Afghanistan is far too rural and spread out to police to the point that the Taliban can be subdued. The political and social infrastructure is not in place carry out such policing. Afghanistan is an open ended conflict. That is, the Taliban have no time table. They aren't on a schedule. Their cause is holy and they are perfectly happy to keep fighting as many decades into the future as necessary.
The only way to stop the Taliban is for the locals to not want to be Taliban, not support the Taliban, and shut off all corruption that aids the Taliban. We, as a nation, cannot affect any of this.
It's time to let the Afghans determine their own destiny. We cannot and far too many have died trying.
The only way to stop the Taliban is for the locals to not want to be Taliban, not support the Taliban, and shut off all corruption that aids the Taliban. We, as a nation, cannot affect any of this.
It's time to let the Afghans determine their own destiny. We cannot and far too many have died trying.
117
If winning is the establishment of a democratic government for a mountainous assemblage of tribal chieftains, Forget it!
1
If President Trump donated one golf round a week to working on policy and strategy with his generals regarding the war in Afghanistan we might learn more. I'm sorry, he will never do that, the golf, to Trump, is more important to Trump than the lives of our young American soldiers.
33
You may be correct that golf, to Trump, is more important than the lives of our young soldiers, but how will adding him to discussions of policy and strategy add anything to the process? It would take a herculean effort to teach the president the complexities that make Afghanistan a challenge and he still wouldn't have a clear sense of what strategies might present the best path forward.
6
Betsy: In the post I apologized for making the suggestion that Trump get involved. You and I know, the generals know, and the American people know that he could never add anything to the process. He is incurious and ignorant of most governing policy and process, whether it is the Afghani war, health care, the environment, etc. He just does not care, except for himself, money and golf.
1
It is well and fine, and correct, for McCain to criticize the current lack of strategy, but the President is not the only one to wash his hands of this conflict. The time for Congress to exert its authority over war making is long overdue. Hopefully, yesterday's 98-2 Senate vote for authority over renewed sanctions on Russia and Iran is an indication that Congress can be both serious and unified when it comes to serious foreign policy issues. One side benefit of a listing executive branch might be a rejuvenated legislature willing to re take its traditional responsibilities for foreign policy, including war making.
9
The more DJT focuses on fending off investigations the less time he has to ruin the big stuff that matters to all of us like healthcare, immigration, geopolitical conflict, tax reform, etc...
We can expect no legislation and certainly no strategy for Afghanistan from this administration, which may be the best news of all.
The fact that DJT has not fully staffed many critical DoD posts tells us all we need to know about his commitment and involvement in keeping our country safe.
We can expect no legislation and certainly no strategy for Afghanistan from this administration, which may be the best news of all.
The fact that DJT has not fully staffed many critical DoD posts tells us all we need to know about his commitment and involvement in keeping our country safe.
22
Letting the field commanders run the war might be a very good idea. 16 years of Bush and Obama didn't actually produce very much.
3
Probably not. Field commanders are not very likely to decide when the best outcome for our country is simply to leave.
4
No, it's a terrible idea. You cannot succeed militarily in Afghanistan by understanding the conflictS there in purely battlefield or insurgency terms. The generals and colonels will continue making the same mistaken assessments that they have made for 16 years. Afghanistan's problems are deeply internal. All our military presence does is focus the ire of civil enemies on us.
What our military should do there is stick to the original purpose of the 2001 invasion: ensure the country does not become a global terrorist haven and prevent whatever government rules the country from aiding and abetting terrorists who would carry out harm and destruction to American and its citizens.
What our military should do there is stick to the original purpose of the 2001 invasion: ensure the country does not become a global terrorist haven and prevent whatever government rules the country from aiding and abetting terrorists who would carry out harm and destruction to American and its citizens.
2
Bush and Obama followed the lead of their field commanders and the field commanders' advice was demonstrably and completely wrong. Sixteen years of following lousy advice is far too long. Accept the facts and get out.
1
As usual, the United States will send just enough troops to lose.
As a rule, either you stay out or you go in with everything you have, even if it means reinstituting a draft. (Yes, there are exceptions, like Grenada or Panama.)
The list of countries that successfully opposed a guerrilla war is very, very short ... the only examples that come to mind are the US in the Philippines (about 1900) and the British against the Boors at about the same time and in Malaya in the late 1940s, and the brutality of those imperialist ventures could probably not be duplicated today.
As a rule, either you stay out or you go in with everything you have, even if it means reinstituting a draft. (Yes, there are exceptions, like Grenada or Panama.)
The list of countries that successfully opposed a guerrilla war is very, very short ... the only examples that come to mind are the US in the Philippines (about 1900) and the British against the Boors at about the same time and in Malaya in the late 1940s, and the brutality of those imperialist ventures could probably not be duplicated today.
10
And we've tried the second. The fact is that we are never satisfied with hit winning. We also must be loved for winning. That's not very likely.
Not sure about the US in the Philippines, but the Brits won the war against the Boers in S.A. by putting their women and children in concentration camps. Indeed, I do not think that is what would be accepted today.
1
16 years and we are still not winning. We're not-winning so much that we're going to get tired of not-winning. How much longer do we keep not-winning?
21
Mr. Trump treats being Commander-in-Chief as if it was a mere honorific whereby he gets the title and military personnel salute him and he gets to self-importantly salute back. Without substance, he is merely playing soldier. He's not a real Commander-in-Chief, but he plays one on TV.
Sadly, having never served himself and having sons and grandsons who never will serve, he has no skin in the game. Others can make the decisions, which he can repudiate if things do not go well (he will claim credit for anything that is a success); other people's sons & grandsons will die or be maimed. The question is whether it is better for the country and for our men & women in uniform if he stays out of it. Only time will tell.
Sadly, having never served himself and having sons and grandsons who never will serve, he has no skin in the game. Others can make the decisions, which he can repudiate if things do not go well (he will claim credit for anything that is a success); other people's sons & grandsons will die or be maimed. The question is whether it is better for the country and for our men & women in uniform if he stays out of it. Only time will tell.
97
This war will not end until people in positions of power, like our president, are made to have skin in the game. Do you think this war would have stretched on this long if sons and daughters and grandchildren of the rich and powerful were put into harm's way to support a corrupt government in an unwinnable war?
Until that time comes, our soldiers are just pawns in a game is being run to protect our 'reputation' as the defender of freedom and to keep American industries rolling along, making lots of money for their executives and stockholders.
This war is a disgrace and it dishonors all the members of the government who vote to continue it.
Until that time comes, our soldiers are just pawns in a game is being run to protect our 'reputation' as the defender of freedom and to keep American industries rolling along, making lots of money for their executives and stockholders.
This war is a disgrace and it dishonors all the members of the government who vote to continue it.
4
An article detailing the complexity of the situation in Afghanistan would be very helpful.
Without actively researching the topic, we the public, know very little about this war.
Without actively researching the topic, we the public, know very little about this war.
14
About 2400 American lives have been lost, and some 30,000 civilians killed, with no semblance of any kind of suspension of the war.
Is the history of the world the history of wars? or is it the history of progress. It isn't that we have never seen this scenario before, it permeates the history in our memory. Perhaps the only thing a "beneficent" hegemon can do is tamp down the passions and the blood lust of the young men. We have the formula: good jobs and Football. The recent shooting suggests that with incendiary rhetoric even that formula can be breached. The Western world has had great progress but not before having the worst wars. We are still the beacon and we should try to remain that, but we still don't have the formula that will tamp the passions down so places like Afghanistan can achieve stability. That is our challenge.
3
This is a strange piece.
The central theme seems to be that "we have always been at war in Eurasia." When Putin's thugs rained violence on Ukraine, we were properly shocked. After all, these days war against other peoples is pretty much our province.
Is it possible that after a decade of our defending the Afghan people those people might have eagerly accepted the torch if they agreed with our goals?
Tim Egan writes about the wonderfulness of youth in power today. One thing that Trudeau and Macron could only have read about in history books that Trump can probably remember are these same discussions about Vietnam. If we could just send a few more American kids to die in the tropics the people living there would finally be inspired to rise up as our allies.
Instead, we bled our Treasury in order to prop up just one more oligarch in a country in which the nexus between money and power was very American indeed if less genteel.
I truly would like to offer aid to anyone who is oppressed, but our way of routing that aid through military contractors and fat Washington lobbyists who tout perpetual war as a way to bring peace brings us back to my first point, whether we're talking about Eurasia or East Asia.
So, bin Laden was holed up in Afghanistan, and we really wanted him. Rather than send in a surgical force to either kill or capture him, we destabilized a government in a region not known for its equilibrium. And now you want to turn this mess over to Trump? That should help.
The central theme seems to be that "we have always been at war in Eurasia." When Putin's thugs rained violence on Ukraine, we were properly shocked. After all, these days war against other peoples is pretty much our province.
Is it possible that after a decade of our defending the Afghan people those people might have eagerly accepted the torch if they agreed with our goals?
Tim Egan writes about the wonderfulness of youth in power today. One thing that Trudeau and Macron could only have read about in history books that Trump can probably remember are these same discussions about Vietnam. If we could just send a few more American kids to die in the tropics the people living there would finally be inspired to rise up as our allies.
Instead, we bled our Treasury in order to prop up just one more oligarch in a country in which the nexus between money and power was very American indeed if less genteel.
I truly would like to offer aid to anyone who is oppressed, but our way of routing that aid through military contractors and fat Washington lobbyists who tout perpetual war as a way to bring peace brings us back to my first point, whether we're talking about Eurasia or East Asia.
So, bin Laden was holed up in Afghanistan, and we really wanted him. Rather than send in a surgical force to either kill or capture him, we destabilized a government in a region not known for its equilibrium. And now you want to turn this mess over to Trump? That should help.
78
THANK YOU. I've been saying this for years. Hunting down bin Laden with SEAL teams is one thing. Invading, occupying and accepting responsibility for the welfare of an entire country is something else entirely.
4
General Mattis should be measuring the space under the bus, so he can be comfortable. Never have we had a Commander in Chief abdicate their responsibility to "own" the military decisions. This is not a network TV show, it's blood and treasure. I would be great if the President could offer the American public a coherent plan for Afghanistan.
69
Trump? Coherent? I suppose on rare occasions when he manages to struggle through reading a prepared speech.
This is an odd situation - our know-nothing President is unlikely to do much worse than more knowledgeable predecessors because Afghanistan is a tar pit for outsiders. We can't ordain the government that it will end up with. We cannot "win" a clear military victory and walk away. Perhaps Russia - in being forced out - was the actual winner in that past phase of the everlasting conflict.
We( as we the people) should get to choose if this is we where we want our soldiers sent - and whether this is really where so much tax money should be thrown away.
I have never heard a completing argument for remaining there.
We( as we the people) should get to choose if this is we where we want our soldiers sent - and whether this is really where so much tax money should be thrown away.
I have never heard a completing argument for remaining there.
32
The way that "we (as we the people)" get to choose is by voting. By electing Donald Trump, even if it was almost by accident, we expressed a choice. We could have elected a woman who had knowledge and experience to understand the complexities of the world, but "we" chose not to. She was too unlikeable, too untrustworthy, and those emails....
The recent shootings in Alexandria have prompted calls for being nicer to the president and his party. Is that an appropriate response to people who are making bad decisions in virtually every aspect of governance?
I don't advocate violence, but we had better get politically active and do it soon and effectively. That is the answer.
The recent shootings in Alexandria have prompted calls for being nicer to the president and his party. Is that an appropriate response to people who are making bad decisions in virtually every aspect of governance?
I don't advocate violence, but we had better get politically active and do it soon and effectively. That is the answer.
4
Are we still pretending Trump is the president of the United States and is actively overseeing things? That he's engaged in US foreign policy and is taking actions accordingly? I'm just curious what he needs to do for you to understand he has no involvement whatsoever in anything other than managing his Twitter account (and if their were dues involved for that that he would be heavily in arrears)?
103
Trump has no clue about history and geopolitics. Heeding Steve Bannon's advice, he downsizes the government, leaving thousands of vacancies unfilled. Bannon pursues a hawkish, hard-right agenda - military might, rather than diplomacy. Rex Tillerson takes the short end of the stick, while James Mattis is empowered to do Trump's dirty work.
To understand Afghanistan one needs to involve more anthropologists than generals. Landlocked and mountainous, it is a tribal country, suffering from chronic instability and conflicts during its modern history. Its economy and infrastructure are in ruins, and many Afghans are refugees. It is naive to believe that 15.000 American troops would make a difference.
Propping up the government led by a former high-ranked World Bank technocrat is a long shot. Ashraf Ghani has made himself unpopular, tackling Afghanistan's entrenched culture of corruption and curbing lawlessness to improve his administration’s tarnished image in the West.
Despite vast amounts of mineral deposits, Afghanistan has no capacity to mine them and relies on foreign aid to stay afloat. The Taliban, warlords, Islamist groups are engaged in a turf war, fighting to gain control of resource-rich territories. That India, Iran, Pakistan and Russia all want to vie for influence is a long political tradition. Throughout history Afghanistan has attracted regional players as a venue of their power struggle, leaving little room for China and the US to gain a foothold.
To understand Afghanistan one needs to involve more anthropologists than generals. Landlocked and mountainous, it is a tribal country, suffering from chronic instability and conflicts during its modern history. Its economy and infrastructure are in ruins, and many Afghans are refugees. It is naive to believe that 15.000 American troops would make a difference.
Propping up the government led by a former high-ranked World Bank technocrat is a long shot. Ashraf Ghani has made himself unpopular, tackling Afghanistan's entrenched culture of corruption and curbing lawlessness to improve his administration’s tarnished image in the West.
Despite vast amounts of mineral deposits, Afghanistan has no capacity to mine them and relies on foreign aid to stay afloat. The Taliban, warlords, Islamist groups are engaged in a turf war, fighting to gain control of resource-rich territories. That India, Iran, Pakistan and Russia all want to vie for influence is a long political tradition. Throughout history Afghanistan has attracted regional players as a venue of their power struggle, leaving little room for China and the US to gain a foothold.
29
Re: those mineral deposits. I remember that one spoil from the Russian time was reportedly a comprehensive report on minerals in Afghanistan. Given that there is always an unstated "compelling" reason for interest in a country (we DO NOT launch military involvement on the basis of human needs) I always wondered if that report held the secret to the attraction of the Temple of Doom. Don't remember actually seeing a copy released.
5
overseeing America’s vast war machine
It will depend on how one wants to define the war machine. In the case of Afghanistan, it would seem to me the war machine is the same as Viet Nam, a government works project to support the Military Industrial Complex. Just pour monies into the industry and destroy the young men and women sent to spend their lives using the machinery of war with no purpose other than using the machinery of war. Regardless of modern POTUS, that seems to be the CIC
It will depend on how one wants to define the war machine. In the case of Afghanistan, it would seem to me the war machine is the same as Viet Nam, a government works project to support the Military Industrial Complex. Just pour monies into the industry and destroy the young men and women sent to spend their lives using the machinery of war with no purpose other than using the machinery of war. Regardless of modern POTUS, that seems to be the CIC
23
Donald Trump has given up civilian control of our military. On the one hand that is a major problem but on the other I would prefer Trump have no say in planning and approving warfare.
45
Abel Fernandez: Good points both--and ones that would be an excellent part of the "cogent debate" the editors suggest is needed. But that would require citizens who understand the concept of civilian control of the military.
I suppose it is better to have Mr. Mattis run things than to see Trump go all military on us and wrap himself in fatigues like a latter day capitalist Fidel Castro. And when he wore his dress uniform, he'd decorate himself with so many ribbons and pins that we wouldn't be able to see him. At least Mr. Mattis would care about the troops being sent to the place empires go to die.
I suppose it is better to have Mr. Mattis run things than to see Trump go all military on us and wrap himself in fatigues like a latter day capitalist Fidel Castro. And when he wore his dress uniform, he'd decorate himself with so many ribbons and pins that we wouldn't be able to see him. At least Mr. Mattis would care about the troops being sent to the place empires go to die.
1
If Secretary Mattis is even half as smart as I think he is, he will develop the broad outlines of a strategy which includes SOS Tillerson, to pressure Pakistan and Russia on their support for the Tailban. The strategy should then be either endorsed or rejected by the President, before any additional personnel are sent to Afghanistan.
Without this, Mattis is guaranteed to receive a fusillade of criticism from the Tweeter-in-Chief at the first predictable reversal of fortune in "The Graveyard of Empires", a dangerous situation indeed for the Secretary and the US military in a world full of bad actors looking for an opportunity.
Without this, Mattis is guaranteed to receive a fusillade of criticism from the Tweeter-in-Chief at the first predictable reversal of fortune in "The Graveyard of Empires", a dangerous situation indeed for the Secretary and the US military in a world full of bad actors looking for an opportunity.
90
How often have military leaders worked to develop a strategy in concert with diplomats? Perhaps it has happened, but I'm dubious.
By law no member of the uniform military can serve in a Senate confirmable federal government position until after seven years have passed since their military retirement.
Prior to James Mattis the only person to receive a Congressional waiver for this requirement was George C. Marshall. James Mattis has never won a war nor sustained a peace. Mattis is no Marshall. Winning wars is about wisdom. Not smarts.
James Mattis spent his life in the alien Spartan USMC. Mattis is a monk who has never been married nor does he have any kids. Mattis as Secretary of Defense is a mockery of civilian American military control.
Prior to James Mattis the only person to receive a Congressional waiver for this requirement was George C. Marshall. James Mattis has never won a war nor sustained a peace. Mattis is no Marshall. Winning wars is about wisdom. Not smarts.
James Mattis spent his life in the alien Spartan USMC. Mattis is a monk who has never been married nor does he have any kids. Mattis as Secretary of Defense is a mockery of civilian American military control.
2
I suspect that Defense Secretary Mattis is far brighter and forward thinking than you seem to expect.
But thank you for setting such a low bar for Mattis to get over. It will make your head(s) explode.
And, how many more times can you afford to have THAT happen before you are permanently relegated to political irrelevance?
But thank you for setting such a low bar for Mattis to get over. It will make your head(s) explode.
And, how many more times can you afford to have THAT happen before you are permanently relegated to political irrelevance?
"Mr. Trump, who has no prior government experience, leaves the impression that he is cowed by the weighty responsibility of sending more Americans into battle, and is looking to put that onus on Mr. Mattis so he has somebody to blame if things go wrong, as he did when he fingered the generals for a botched raid in Yemen in January, in which one member of the Navy SEALs was killed."
Absolutely! The main reason Donald Trump does anything is either to brag about success or name a "responsible" target to blame during fallout from failure.
"The buck stops here" should be printed up on post-its that Trump can stick to the foreheads of whomever he assigns responsibility.
Is it to hard for Donald Trump to immerse himself in foreign policy decisions? How lazy can you be? Less time for cable TV? Less time for tweeting?
As far as I recall, sending more troops to Afghanistan wasn't a campaign pledge. And with good reason--America is sick and tired of sending its sons and daughters to "advise" or otherwise be in harm's way in countries where wars are unwinnable and troops face clear and present danger.
By outsourcing tough decisions to General Mattis, The Commander in Chief is missing in action and derelict in his own duty. The man who avoided Viet Nam with a heel spur seems ready again to avoid military matters where he might have to take a permanent stand.
Absolutely! The main reason Donald Trump does anything is either to brag about success or name a "responsible" target to blame during fallout from failure.
"The buck stops here" should be printed up on post-its that Trump can stick to the foreheads of whomever he assigns responsibility.
Is it to hard for Donald Trump to immerse himself in foreign policy decisions? How lazy can you be? Less time for cable TV? Less time for tweeting?
As far as I recall, sending more troops to Afghanistan wasn't a campaign pledge. And with good reason--America is sick and tired of sending its sons and daughters to "advise" or otherwise be in harm's way in countries where wars are unwinnable and troops face clear and present danger.
By outsourcing tough decisions to General Mattis, The Commander in Chief is missing in action and derelict in his own duty. The man who avoided Viet Nam with a heel spur seems ready again to avoid military matters where he might have to take a permanent stand.
215
"is it to hard for Donald Trump to immerse himself in foreign policy decisions? How lazy can you be? Less time for cable TV? Less time for tweeting?"
I believe that The Donald has neither the basic intellectual curiosity nor the intelligence to understand the complexities of diplomacy required to reach any kind of successful outcome in a place as historically complicated as Afghanistan.
I believe that The Donald has neither the basic intellectual curiosity nor the intelligence to understand the complexities of diplomacy required to reach any kind of successful outcome in a place as historically complicated as Afghanistan.
6
Donald Trump is the Buck Passer in Chief. He knows how to give orders, he doesn't know how to command.
3
President Trump has been in charge for five months. President Obama had eight years to confront the basic security, political, and to provide a comprehensive strategy to resolve the conflict. The Times does not argue that the "strategy" and troops levels Trump inherited from Obama are working.
There are no solutions by which we will have a victory with troop marching through some vanquished foreign capital. When we as a nation in 2001 chose to invade and occupy Afghanistan, we took on the moral obligation to stay in Afghanistan until it is stabilized, which will probably take decades, if not generations. The Afghans have now taken on responsibility in securing their own country, and they are paying by far the heaviest price in blood in the effort to prevent the country from devolving into chaos or returning to rule by the medieval Taliban. The United States and our NATO allies have generally been in a support role, with Afghan forces fighting the battles for over two years.
The question is not how many American troops are needed to achieve some elusive "victory," such as we had in World War II. The question is how many troops are needed to keep the Afghans in the fight and ensure that the country does not collapse, but maintains enough stability for the Afghans to continue to improve their abilities to self-govern. If 5000 more troops will do that, the cost is negligible to the United States, and of immeasurable value to Afghanistan and to world stability.
There are no solutions by which we will have a victory with troop marching through some vanquished foreign capital. When we as a nation in 2001 chose to invade and occupy Afghanistan, we took on the moral obligation to stay in Afghanistan until it is stabilized, which will probably take decades, if not generations. The Afghans have now taken on responsibility in securing their own country, and they are paying by far the heaviest price in blood in the effort to prevent the country from devolving into chaos or returning to rule by the medieval Taliban. The United States and our NATO allies have generally been in a support role, with Afghan forces fighting the battles for over two years.
The question is not how many American troops are needed to achieve some elusive "victory," such as we had in World War II. The question is how many troops are needed to keep the Afghans in the fight and ensure that the country does not collapse, but maintains enough stability for the Afghans to continue to improve their abilities to self-govern. If 5000 more troops will do that, the cost is negligible to the United States, and of immeasurable value to Afghanistan and to world stability.
7
We took on no such "moral obligation" when Bush invaded Afghanistan to kill Bin Laden and root out al Qaeda. The military botched the job initially and have continued to flail ever since, in large part because the military and political leaders misapprehended the Bin Laden threat and the shifting nature of the conflict. Afghanistan will take care of itself when we leave and we have no legitimate reason to stay.
2
If your son was one of those troops, you would not find the cost negligible or immeasurable. Also, the cost to the taxpayers is entirely measurable: $32 billion per month. That would pay for a lot of health care for people here in the U.S. In fact, it would provide free health care for the 24 million people that are about to lose coverage under Trump/Ryan care, plus we'd still have close to 8 billion dollars a month left over that we could spend on infrastructure. Assuming the Republicans didn't just funnel it all to the .01%
8
Failure begins with the notion that any American can "provide a comprehensive strategy to resolve the conflict."
2
More importantly than your correct and obvious conclusion that Trump has no plan (because he does not care about the outcome and he just likes getting saluted and being Commander in Chief).
Why do we care about controlling Afganistan?
Why do we care about controlling Afganistan?
63
America's longest war has cost too much in lives and resources. Will we really allow Trump to also sacrifice our wise tradition of civilian control over the military? In total, a high cost indeed.
77
Excellent question. The answer may be related to the reason the Brits mounted their first, and disastrous, intrusion into Afghanistan--to keep Russia out, and to keep India in the western bloc.
3
Given that we are choosing not to lead in the world any longer, i.e. backing out of trade agreements and climate accords, hesitating with NATO commitments, and failing to model corruption free government. Our role in world military affairs should also shift back to that of a second or third tier country that we are becoming. Let's just declare victory and back out of Afghanistan, .... Trump style. While we are at it we could drop our military expenditures to 2.5% of GDP and redirect the money to rebuild our infrastructure, ... you know, make America great again.
366
Does any rational person really think that "the Afghanistan war" begun by George "W" Bush, the "decider", one of two wars started primarily to fund American Military contractors for the rest of American History, is really the responsibility of all Presidents until the end of American History?
C'mon, in a country that is the modern equivalent of Sparta, a country and economy primarily subsisting on wars that are not needed and offer no benefit to the USA as a whole, delegating the infinite nature of the war to the General's is rational.
IF we are going to spend ALL of our money on WAR then we actually don't need an American President. We just need Generals and Military Contractors.
No need for new schools. No need for a modern electrical grid. No need for a modern train system to foreshadow the loss of fossil fuels like what the Chinese are doing.
If all we are going to do is spend all of our money on war, and, nothing inside the USA, we don't even need Congress.
Like Sparta, we just need warriors willing to......
get crushed when the rest of the world finally tires of continuous war against them.
C'mon, in a country that is the modern equivalent of Sparta, a country and economy primarily subsisting on wars that are not needed and offer no benefit to the USA as a whole, delegating the infinite nature of the war to the General's is rational.
IF we are going to spend ALL of our money on WAR then we actually don't need an American President. We just need Generals and Military Contractors.
No need for new schools. No need for a modern electrical grid. No need for a modern train system to foreshadow the loss of fossil fuels like what the Chinese are doing.
If all we are going to do is spend all of our money on war, and, nothing inside the USA, we don't even need Congress.
Like Sparta, we just need warriors willing to......
get crushed when the rest of the world finally tires of continuous war against them.
356
If I recall correctly, the good Spartan soldier returned from war "with his shield or on it".
Hmmmm...if those shields are made of steel, do you suppose our defense contractors will outsource shield production to China...?
Hmmmm...if those shields are made of steel, do you suppose our defense contractors will outsource shield production to China...?
For sometime now, the US military has been doing whatever it has wished to do, irrespective of who is the president. One should remember what happened when Edward Snowdon was rumored to be flying from Russia to Bolivia on Evo Morales plane? Mr. Obama went on TV and in no uncertain terms declared that the US military jets will not be scrambling Moraes plane, since that would be a violation of international law. But, then, the US military decided that Mr. Obama is not the one who runs the place. So, they forced Morales' plane to land in Austria, and searched it for Mr. Snowdon.
If you are a student of history, you can find many other examples of this type of behaviour from the US military. I am guessing that it started soon after President Dwight D. Eisenhower finished his term. In his final days, he did warn Americans of the coming "military-industrial complex".
Essentially, what Mr. Trump has done is formalizing what is the reality of the US government. Having a president and the Congress around is not a bad idea, as it gives a cover, as well as legitamacy, to the military-industrial complex that runs the country.
If you are a student of history, you can find many other examples of this type of behaviour from the US military. I am guessing that it started soon after President Dwight D. Eisenhower finished his term. In his final days, he did warn Americans of the coming "military-industrial complex".
Essentially, what Mr. Trump has done is formalizing what is the reality of the US government. Having a president and the Congress around is not a bad idea, as it gives a cover, as well as legitamacy, to the military-industrial complex that runs the country.
1
Oh, good heavens...That meme was trashed long ago.
And yet, like a true liberal, you trot it out again in hopes that this time it works...
Just like the call for more money to be poured into those "matters" that you see as important, not recognizing the trillions of dollars already spent to achieve to not-so-successful results about which you are now complaining.
Get a grip, man, more of the same in hope that this time it will work has been practiced for more than half-a-century. Isn't it time to realize that and find other ways to achieve the goals.
And isn't that part of why the liberal has lost more than 900 seats at the political tables at the state and federal levels?
Go back and do some thinking instead of parroting the shop-worn talking points. Come up with some innovative ideas that may have a chance of working and that will be able to muster sufficient support to become law.
You might be able to lead yourself out of political irrelevance and actually do some good for the very unfortunates in whose interest you claim to speak.
And yet, like a true liberal, you trot it out again in hopes that this time it works...
Just like the call for more money to be poured into those "matters" that you see as important, not recognizing the trillions of dollars already spent to achieve to not-so-successful results about which you are now complaining.
Get a grip, man, more of the same in hope that this time it will work has been practiced for more than half-a-century. Isn't it time to realize that and find other ways to achieve the goals.
And isn't that part of why the liberal has lost more than 900 seats at the political tables at the state and federal levels?
Go back and do some thinking instead of parroting the shop-worn talking points. Come up with some innovative ideas that may have a chance of working and that will be able to muster sufficient support to become law.
You might be able to lead yourself out of political irrelevance and actually do some good for the very unfortunates in whose interest you claim to speak.
Be careful what you wish for. Keeping Trump's small hands out of the management of military intervention may be preferable to the greater disaster that might otherwise come to pass.
107
Death and fear come in many forms. America has a narrow bandwidth of favorites; mass shootings, spree killings, terrorist attacks, the cruel slaughter of children, domestic disputes--war, killings that spring from cops' imaginations. Domestic not international--despite London/Nice/Nigeria/Kenya/Afghanistan. Terror not hate crimes that, without 9/11, lead in incidents and injuries and are rising.
Certainly not the invisible dead, the statistics that silently reflect public policy, deaths demeaned by the lies that support them and by wealth the government passes on to the rich. In healthcare, these deaths in the next decade may total 3 million.
I had a moral deficit, a commenter said: the people, uninsured, have a choice; the people killed by blind attacks do not. I think both are blindsided: one by the system, the other by people the system produced. War by both.
The common thread is excess turned extreme. By guns, bombs, trucks, or policy, death is the result. Justified by extreme myths about life and dignity, guided by channels as different as faith and balance sheets.
The point is not which is more horrific but that they are connected. Globally, the bottom billion are in poverty traps. Conditions that make terrorism or political violence unpredictable. Like policy and the conditions driven by policy, its statistical pain, while concentrated, is also scattered and random. Except in locker rooms, its mirror strikes greater fear: we see our own carnage of blood.
Certainly not the invisible dead, the statistics that silently reflect public policy, deaths demeaned by the lies that support them and by wealth the government passes on to the rich. In healthcare, these deaths in the next decade may total 3 million.
I had a moral deficit, a commenter said: the people, uninsured, have a choice; the people killed by blind attacks do not. I think both are blindsided: one by the system, the other by people the system produced. War by both.
The common thread is excess turned extreme. By guns, bombs, trucks, or policy, death is the result. Justified by extreme myths about life and dignity, guided by channels as different as faith and balance sheets.
The point is not which is more horrific but that they are connected. Globally, the bottom billion are in poverty traps. Conditions that make terrorism or political violence unpredictable. Like policy and the conditions driven by policy, its statistical pain, while concentrated, is also scattered and random. Except in locker rooms, its mirror strikes greater fear: we see our own carnage of blood.
43
I wasn't sure how I was going to phrase my sentiment. It's better left to you.
1
An empty barrel , lots of noise,
No insight and devoid of poise,
By his own words is Great
Wisest Head of State
Behavior the whole world annoys.
An Ego that is rump directed
Produced what observers expected
A series of Orders
dim witted disorders
By one that a Rust Belt elected.
No insight and devoid of poise,
By his own words is Great
Wisest Head of State
Behavior the whole world annoys.
An Ego that is rump directed
Produced what observers expected
A series of Orders
dim witted disorders
By one that a Rust Belt elected.
120
Actually, Afghanistan is now, technically, General Mattis' war now. Mr. Trump abdicated his presidential powers to him. He's too busy making deals and turning our nation into an oligarchy to bother himself with wars. His job is to stir trouble, make deals that translate into cold hard cash, and then get out of the way of the generals. Afghanistan is one example. The Middle East is another example. There, we were told of the Saudi Arms deal when Trump visited with that nation's despot, and we just learned of a multi-billion dollar deal with Qatar, even though Trump is siding with the Saudis in their new dispute.
Everything is about how to extract the most money at home, and throughout the world now, consequences and lives be damned. All money must float up to the elites, let the world eat cake.
--
American oligarchy
http://www.rimaregas.com/?s=oligarchy
Everything is about how to extract the most money at home, and throughout the world now, consequences and lives be damned. All money must float up to the elites, let the world eat cake.
--
American oligarchy
http://www.rimaregas.com/?s=oligarchy
246
McConnell and Ryan, of the 'family values party need to be taken to the woodshed.
2