Current Events > Trump likely to withdraw from Afghanistan

(+) Yeah! (+)

BalisticWarri0r posted...

ChainedRedone posted...

VictimComplex posted...

s0nicfan posted...

Joeydollaz posted...

Are we sure he isn't gearing the Soldiers to come Protect the USA from a event?

this move and leaving Syria...its odd

I bet it has something to do with this:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46640114

I was actually gonna praise Trump before I saw this... Uh, if Mattis is this strongly against this, I'm not sure this is a great idea. Mattis knows a hell of a lot more than we do, and Trump is just desperate to keep campaign promises regardless of consequences.

The Taliban is going to take over the country again. Afghanistan is such a fucked country.

They already control the country.

No, but they control 40-50% of the territory.

Spooking posted...

I understand, I just don't want the US to be in perpetual war. Bring home the troops, use the money we save for infrastructure and healthcare, and use diplomatic means in the middle east. Stop the CIA coups and all of that shit.

CIA coups? The 1980s called, they want their foreign policy back. Seriously, we stopped doing that after the end of the cold war, and don't give me that Alex Jones shit about Hillary Clinton being involved in some Honduras coup in 2009.
---

SpudForce posted...

The s*** we did during the War on Terror and decades of Cold War f***ery before that ensures that hatred is not going to go away anytime soon. We've made our bed, now we have to lie in it, burying our heads in the sand is not going to do anything.

How many 9/11's would you estimate we prevented by going to war in Afghanistan?
---

Anteaterking posted...

SpudForce posted...

The s*** we did during the War on Terror and decades of Cold War f***ery before that ensures that hatred is not going to go away anytime soon. We've made our bed, now we have to lie in it, burying our heads in the sand is not going to do anything.

How many 9/11's would you estimate we prevented by going to war in Afghanistan?

We definitely drew in a lot of foreign jihadists into Afghanistan by having US forces there, killed quite a few of them to boot. We were a convenient target and symbol of the nation they despise with their very being, Afghanistan is a lot easier for them to reach than the CONUS after all. I consider not having a major terrorist (at least by foreigners) attack committed on our soil since 9/11 to be a major success.
---

SpudForce posted...

We definitely drew in a lot of foreign jihadists into Afghanistan by having US forces there, killed quite a few of them to boot. We were a convenient target and symbol of the nation they despise with their very being, Afghanistan is a lot easier for them to reach than the CONUS after all. I consider not having a major terrorist (at least by foreigners) attack committed on our soil since 9/11 to be a major success.

So it's been 17 years and we haven't had an attack. But what was the last major terrorist attack committed by foreign terrorists on our soil before 9/11?

Do you think there would have been one if we hadn't gone to war? Why?

Also, American casualties in the war on terror have been 2-3 9/11s already at this point. So unless you think we've prevented at least 4 9/11s, we're just breaking even or behind at this point.
---

Anteaterking posted...

So it's been 17 years and we haven't had an attack. But what was the last major terrorist attack committed by foreign terrorists on our soil before 9/11?

You are ignoring several smaller scale attacks like the Fort Hood shooting and the San Bernadino shooting.

The next thing to remember is that the War on Terror was never a US-only thing. We have a lot of partners in this. Look at Europe right now. Terrorism in Europe corresponded with the rise of ISIS; when ISIS was at its peak, terrorism in Europe was also at its peak. Since ISIS has been diminished, so has the rate of attacks.

I think there is a clear linkage between the establishment of a caliphate and the terror threat to the West.

Anteaterking posted...

Also, American casualties in the war on terror have been 2-3 9/11s already at this point

We really shouldn't be including the 2003-2011 Iraq War in that, as that was something planned well before 9/11 for reasons that ultimately did not have a major connection to the War on Terrorism.

The US has still lost less than one 9/11 worth of troops in Afghanistan, but if you count NATO allies, it goes up to a bit more than 1. If you want to include other theaters like Somalia/Syria/Africa/etc. I am sure it doesn't go up by that much, as involvement there has been at a much smaller scale.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_casualties_in_Afghanistan

Obviously each of these is still a tragedy, but the numbers you are putting out are way too high.
---

The Taliban will be in charge again there by the end of 2019.
---

You're not gonna make me oppose the US getting out of a middle eastern country
---

Anteaterking posted...

SpudForce posted...

We definitely drew in a lot of foreign jihadists into Afghanistan by having US forces there, killed quite a few of them to boot. We were a convenient target and symbol of the nation they despise with their very being, Afghanistan is a lot easier for them to reach than the CONUS after all. I consider not having a major terrorist (at least by foreigners) attack committed on our soil since 9/11 to be a major success.

So it's been 17 years and we haven't had an attack. But what was the last major terrorist attack committed by foreign terrorists on our soil before 9/11?

Do you think there would have been one if we hadn't gone to war? Why?

Also, American casualties in the war on terror have been 2-3 9/11s already at this point. So unless you think we've prevented at least 4 9/11s, we're just breaking even or behind at this point.

Yes because if we hadn't gone into Afghanistan and drove Al-Qaeda into the shit filled caves they were forced to hide in after the US and Afghan Northern Alliance kicked their ass, Al-Qaeda would've been able to rally every would be jihadist under their banner after pulling off 9/11.
---

Sativa_Rose posted...

You are ignoring several smaller scale attacks like the Fort Hood shooting and the San Bernadino shooting.

I don't think a couple of lone wolf's with a grudge are any sort of comparison to a planned and coordinated attack where the perpetrators are given succor by those that are supposed to be our allies.
---

Antifar posted...

You're not gonna make me oppose the US getting out of a middle eastern country

Afghanistan isn't even in the Middle East technically, but most Americans lump Afghanistan and Pakistan in with the Middle East despite their actually being in South Asia.
---

In a vaccuum Trump getting us out of Syria and Afghanistan would be basically the biggest positive bit of foreign policy any president has done in a very long time. In practice, he appears to be angling for it on a positive-PR-please-elect-me-whim without a lot of planning behind it, but also against the will of the shitty warhawks he has surrounded himself with. i'm not about to suddenly flip and pretend that i love america destabilizing other countries, but the value in this is definitely going to be in if trump can withdraw troops from those areas in such a way that it's not going to fuck things up even more than we already have.

If he succeeds I won't hesitate to praise it because nothing good comes of our involvement, but if he screws the pooch with this (which, going on his foreign policy track record, he will), it's going to be a real fucking mess
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

Sativa_Rose posted...

You are ignoring several smaller scale attacks like the Fort Hood shooting and the San Bernadino shooting.

I don't think a couple of lone wolf's with a grudge are any sort of comparison to a planned and coordinated attack where the perpetrators are given succor by those that are supposed to be our allies.

Remember these?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_2015_Paris_attacks

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_bombings

And there have been many more attacks like these that were thwarted.
---

Sativa_Rose posted...

You are ignoring several smaller scale attacks like the Fort Hood shooting and the San Bernadino shooting.

He chose not to include those, not me.

Sativa_Rose posted...

The next thing to remember is that the War on Terror was never a US-only thing. We have a lot of partners in this. Look at Europe right now. Terrorism in Europe corresponded with the rise of ISIS; when ISIS was at its peak, terrorism in Europe was also at its peak. Since ISIS has been diminished, so has the rate of attacks.

ISIS/Al Qaeda/etc. attacks in Europe increased after we began the war on terror, so I'm not sure that's any indication that we're succeeding. ISIS's power increased while we were active in Iraq.

Sativa_Rose posted...

We really shouldn't be including the 2003-2011 Iraq War in that, as that was something planned well before 9/11 for reasons that ultimately did not have a major connection to the War on Terrorism.

The War on Terror officially includes the Iraq War. Those were the motivations sold to the public. The internal justifications for it doesn't allow you to pretend that it's somehow distinct, especially since our actions there are partially responsible for the rise of ISIS , who you consider an adversary of ours in the War on Terror and we fought members of in Iraq.

Sativa_Rose posted...

Obviously each of these is still a tragedy, but the numbers you are putting out are way too high.

You threw out an entire war, with the most casualties.
---

I threw it out because I don't think it should be equated with Afghanistan. Really we should be considering these all separate from each other (Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, etc.) Generalizations about the "Middle East" are usually bad takes because it really does vary from country to country.

Anteaterking posted...

ISIS/Al Qaeda/etc. attacks in Europe increased after we began the war on terror, so I'm not sure that's any indication that we're succeeding. ISIS's power increased while we were active in Iraq.

The rise of ISIS corresponds with US withdrawal at the end of 2011. Had that not happened, you would not have had the ISIS caliphate which would have likely prevented some/all of the terrorist attacks in Europe.

The War on Terror really began before 9/11 anyways, but 9/11 certainly brought it to the forefront. You had the WTC bombings in 1993, the US embassy bombings in Kenya/Tanzania in 1998, and the USS Cole attack in 2000, for example.

So basically I think you are wrong in thinking that the root of the problem is actually the War on Terror rather than the terrorists themselves. If we withdraw, the problem will get worse. We can't withdraw and go back to some pre-terrorism world that never actually existed.
---

Sativa_Rose posted...

I threw it out because I don't think it should be equated with Afghanistan. Really we should be considering these all separate from each other (Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, etc.) Generalizations about the "Middle East" are usually bad takes because it really does vary from country to country.

Anteaterking posted...

ISIS/Al Qaeda/etc. attacks in Europe increased after we began the war on terror, so I'm not sure that's any indication that we're succeeding. ISIS's power increased while we were active in Iraq.

The rise of ISIS corresponds with US withdrawal at the end of 2011. Had that not happened, you would not have had the ISIS caliphate which would have likely prevented some/all of the terrorist attacks in Europe.

The War on Terror really began before 9/11 anyways, but 9/11 certainly brought it to the forefront. You had the WTC bombings in 1993, the US embassy bombings in Kenya/Tanzania in 1998, and the USS Cole attack in 2000, for example.

So basically I think you are wrong in thinking that the root of the problem is actually the War on Terror rather than the terrorists themselves. If we withdraw, the problem will get worse. We can't withdraw and go back to some pre-terrorism world that never actually existed.

It also didn't help that Maliki gutted the Iraqi Army of any competent officer after we left, regardless of how you view Iraq; leaving it the way we did was a huge mistake on our part. ISIS was able to take advantage of the power vacuum and only grew to stupendous proportions after our withdrawal.
---

SpudForce posted...

It also didn't help that Maliki gutted the Iraqi Army of any competent officer after we left, regardless of how you view Iraq; leaving it the way we did was a huge mistake on our part. ISIS was able to take advantage of the power vacuum and only grew to stupendous proportions after our withdrawal.

Agreed. I get that we had an issue with the Status of Forces Agreement, but Obama waited too long to get back involved. We could have spared the people a lot of bloodshed if ISIS had been prevented from seizing so many major cities.
---

Sativa_Rose posted...

I threw it out because I don't think it should be equated with Afghanistan. Really we should be considering these all separate from each other (Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, etc.) Generalizations about the "Middle East" are usually bad takes because it really does vary from country to country.

But I'm talking about the War on Terror, which literally is the umbrella that all of this falls under. It's not like if Somalian militants blew up a building in Florida that I would say "Well, I mean look at all of our success in Iraq and Afghanistan. Each country varies wildly, so I'd say the War on Terror itself is still a success".

Sativa_Rose posted...

The rise of ISIS corresponds with US withdrawal at the end of 2011. Had that not happened, you would not have had the ISIS caliphate which would have likely prevented some/all of the terrorist attacks in Europe.

The troop surge (2007) was in response to a rise in ISIS. Sure, it wasn't until 2014 that you started getting talk of a worldwide caliphate, but I'm not just talking about when it was at its peak.

Sativa_Rose posted...

The War on Terror really began before 9/11 anyways, but 9/11 certainly brought it to the forefront. You had the WTC bombings in 1993, the US embassy bombings in Kenya/Tanzania in 1998, and the USS Cole attack in 2000, for example.

So basically I think you are wrong in thinking that the root of the problem is actually the War on Terror rather than the terrorists themselves. If we withdraw, the problem will get worse. We can't withdraw and go back to some pre-terrorism world that never actually existed.

I'm not even claiming that we are the sole motivation for terrorists. I just think there's little to no rationale for claiming that the WoT has been a success or that we have protected America by waging it.
---

Horseshit, what an awful president, we want our troops over there fighting wars.
---

The BBC did a interesting analysis on this, and basically comes to the conclusion that there's no real justification for the troops to remain there. I didn't realize how inconsequential of a force we were talking about until I read it, but we're only talking about 2,000 troops total throughout all of Syria.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-46626115
---

Anteaterking posted...

The troop surge (2007) was in response to a rise in ISIS. Sure, it wasn't until 2014 that you started getting talk of a worldwide caliphate, but I'm not just talking about when it was at its peak.

It was a precursor group to the modern ISIS, but basically yeah. The group was weakened to a point of near-defeat. The vacuum left by Western withdrawal and the incompetence of the Iraqi state led to their rapid rise to power. That is what I don't want to happen again.

We can't go back in time and undo the George W. Bush presidency. We have to think about the best move going forward and not get caught up in sunk costs.

I think a rapid withdrawal will be a mistake.

Anteaterking posted...

I'm not even claiming that we are the sole motivation for terrorists. I just think there's little to no rationale for claiming that the WoT has been a success or that we have protected America by waging it.

You are right here as the WoT has not been very successful, but I would say that what we need to do is change our approach rather than give up on it entirely.
---

SpudForce posted...

I have mixed feelings on this, on one hand fuck Afghanistan but on the other hand the last time we abandoned support for Afghanistan in the 80s the country turned into safe haven for international terrorists. I can't help but feel this will eventually bite us in the ass again.

I think the big problem is that we will end up going back at some point. When that happens we will have to fight our way back in at the cost of American lives. Currently we are occupying with little cost(casualty).
---

s0nicfan posted...

The BBC did a interesting analysis on this, and basically comes to the conclusion that there's no real justification for the troops to remain there. I didn't realize how inconsequential of a force we were talking about until I read it, but we're only talking about 2,000 troops total throughout all of Syria.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-46626115

Why did Mattis resign then? He's put up with so many of Trump's boneheaded decisions that if this was inconsequential, he'd have shrugged it off.
---

VictimComplex posted...

s0nicfan posted...

The BBC did a interesting analysis on this, and basically comes to the conclusion that there's no real justification for the troops to remain there. I didn't realize how inconsequential of a force we were talking about until I read it, but we're only talking about 2,000 troops total throughout all of Syria.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-46626115

Why did Mattis resign then? He's put up with so many of Trump's boneheaded decisions that if this was inconsequential, he'd have shrugged it off.

The BBC article underestimates the work that still remains to be done to defeat ISIS and doesn't put serious weight on Turkey's ambitions to wipe out the Kurds.
---

Good
---

metralo posted...

boy he's really desperate to get the mueller talks out of the headlines

about fucking time tho, good move

---

Great news. Take them out of Afghanistan and station them at the border. That way, they can be home while they defend the best country in the world: The United States of America.