they are civilian ... this isn’t a movie the failure of the Afghan gov isn’t an indication of what the Afghan people want
Well, if the progressive majority aren't willing to fight and die like the ideological minority then they will be slaves. The Americans/NATO have tried but even with that massive assistance the anti-Taliban Afghans haven't been able to do it.
I think that's a misplaced comparison. We can't compare civilian to soldiers. So let's not put the blame at the civilian but at the radical component in their country - the Taliban.
Exactly, if you are not willing to fight for a different life style when there is "massive" support from the international communities, what do you expect? They might be better off with a strong man (general) vs the current incompetent Democratic leadership.
Of course I blame the Taliban. However, if they are the "minority" its incumbent on the "majority" to organize themselves and defeat this minority. They can't/won't even with massive support from the U.S./Nato. Afghanistan is about to turn the clock back to 815 because the majority good guys can't figure out a way to effectively organize themselves and defeat the minority bad guys. That's on the majority good guys. The U.S./NATO can't stay in Afghanistan forever. It's been 19 years and the Taliban is stronger then at any point since the invasion. The Afghan people have had a tremendous opportunity to reshape their country but they haven't taken it.
I agree with most of this. Where I differ, I think, is we have spent so much resources there that we should take a hard look at how we leave to maximize our return. This feels more like a pullout and let the “wild west” takes over. Perhaps there have been negotiations going on with the Afghan gov that have not been reported but from what I read, they were not involved.
commentary at The Federalist: https://thefederalist.com/2020/03/0...ign-policy-record-he-can-take-to-re-election/ excerpt: The bottom line is this. Afghan internal politics and dynamics are not an American, or indeed British, concern, as these have no direct security bearing on the United States or the West. This isn’t 2002. Technology has advanced, with modern platforms allowing for greater long-distance vigilance and punitive measures. Research suggests the West should have let the strongest pro-Western warlord take over Afghanistan and impose a brutal peace, instead of attempting to impose a 1960s-style sexual revolution on a feudal society funded and guarded by Western blood and treasures. President Trump now needs to remember, as repeated surveys show, that the majority of Americans and of veterans want a complete withdrawal from Afghanistan. This is a winning foreign policy, and one for the history books. There is nothing conservative about trying to shape feudal societies, and nothing realist about thinking every adversary and theater is reminiscent of Germany and Munich circa 1938. The signing of the deal marks a record to go to an election with, with no war with Iran, a partial drawdown from Iraq and Syria, the peace deal signed with Afghanistan, no new war started anywhere, an no intervention in Venezuela. It’s not perfect, as no administration ever is, but it’s better than the last 20 years.
I have to largely agree. I think people b**ching about this are doing so because it's happening under Trump. If Obama had resolved the U.S.'s involvement in Afghanistan they wouldn't be nearly so cynical. My opinion is the U.S. pulling out of Afghanistan is going to result in a disaster for the Afghan people but I think that would be true in 2014, 2020 or 2040. The U.S. just has to leave or this never ending conflict will help destroy our society as well. We've burned trillions but it doesn't help to continue to burn trillions more. The people of Afghanistan, writ large, aren't amenable to Westernernized Democracy with Western values and you can't make them. They have their own complex inter-tribal rivalries, extreme religious views and other dynamics at work. We can't force them to change. Much like the vast majority of Russians are cool with Putin being their dictator. The majority are happy with it so *shrugs* that's up to them.
Hasn't the Afghan government already said they didn't agree with this deal? Seems they don't want to surrender prisoners until after they negotiate since the prisoners are one of their main bargaining chips...
Gamut of possibilities on the deal and what’s are the bad and good one... https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2020/02/25/good-deals-and-bad-ones-with-the-taliban/ Talk to the issue of ignoring the Afghan and basically setting them up for failure https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...-worst-day-for-counterterrorism-since-sept-11
How many years are we suppose to be there? 20 years is a long time, if they cannot get their act together in 20 years, how many years do they need? So it will probably be like South Vietnam we the US bailed, but what do they expect?
Peace deal is conveniently not fully in place until after elections... I call BS and can smell this will be broken off. Trump just wants to get that monkey off his back until after November.
We should leave but let’s put our allies, the Afghan gov, at the best possible position to succeed. Signing a deal that they reject a day later is not the way to do it. The US is probably going to stick to their commitments of the deal anyway (still play well politically and trump can blame the Afghan gov if they complain). It’s a pullout deal without much care to our allies.
Afghanistan's incredibly corrupt government is a US creation that unfortunately never represented its people, and has been little more than a confederation of warlords on the take. The western effort to build a nation there was a catastrophic failure, and an enormous waste of lives and money. Bush and Obama should have left a long time ago, and remained for questionable political reasons. If Trump actually does it, the world is better for it.
