Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

A thin legal pretext to veneer over their personal religious and political desires

Shallow, uninformed, and lacking identity

Never entrust democracy to any process that requires republicans to act in good faith.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

In my day, never was longer.

Balloon Juice has never been a refuge for the linguistically delicate.

The party of Reagan has become the party of Putin.

You can’t love your country only when you win.

Historically it was a little unusual for the president to be an incoherent babbling moron.

Wow, I can’t imagine what it was like to comment in morse code.

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

And now I have baud making fun of me. this day can’t get worse.

They fucked up the fucking up of the fuckup!

When your entire life is steeped in white supremacy, equality feels like discrimination.

We cannot abandon the truth and remain a free nation.

Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.

Since when do we limit our critiques to things we could do better ourselves?

Some judge needs to shut this circus down soon.

This blog will pay for itself.

When I decide to be condescending, you won’t have to dream up a fantasy about it.

Optimism opens the door to great things.

You can’t attract Republican voters. You can only out organize them.

Whoever he was, that guy was nuts.

So it was an October Surprise A Day, like an Advent calendar but for crime.

You are here: Home / Foreign Affairs / New U.S. Plan in Afghanistan: Get Out

New U.S. Plan in Afghanistan: Get Out

by | 186 Comments

This post is in: , ,

From The Washington Post:

President Biden will withdraw all American troops from Afghanistan over the coming months, people familiar with the plans said, completing the military exit by the 20th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that first drew the United States into its longest war…

Biden’s decision comes after an administration review of U.S. options in Afghanistan, where U.S.-midwived peace talks have failed to advance as hoped and the Taliban remains a potent force despite two decades of effort by the United States to defeat the militants and establish stable, democratic governance. The war has cost trillions of dollars in addition to the lives of more than 2,000 U.S. service members and at least 100,000 Afghan civilians.

“This is the immediate, practical reality that our policy review discovered,” the person familiar with the deliberations said. “If we break the May 1st deadline negotiated by the previous administration with no clear plan to exit, we will be back at war with the Taliban, and that was not something President Biden believed was in the national interest.”

I’m about as far from a military strategist as it’s possible for a human being to be, having lost every game of Risk I ever played and failing even to advance from Brownie to Girl Scout in the only uniformed service organization I ever joined. That said, I think this is the right decision — the only decision under the circumstances.

Kudos to Biden and his team for making this decision when there was probably a ton of pressure to keep having a go at an exhausting, futile and ultimately losing effort. I hope they are generous with visas and other appropriate assistance to people in Afghanistan who’ve risked their lives to help US and NATO service members.

Open thread.

Reader Interactions

186Comments

  2. 2.

    cain

    I think it’s time we got out of there and Iraq and for godsakes let’s hope we don’t occupy some other country. I have no idea what will happen to Afghanistan without us, but ultimately they need to figure it out.​
     
    ETA: OMG.. at last.. AT LAST – this day is just getting better and better!

  3. 3.

    Cheryl Rofer

    This is really important –

    In the past, there have always been conditions – if this agreement is reached, if fighting in that province slows down, yatta yatta. Those conditional allowed the military and others to say “The time is not right.” This time, we’re getting out. Period.

    And I think there will be an almost immediate withdrawal of some troops.

  4. 4.

    dr. bloor

    Afghanistan: the biggest home-field advantage in world conquest for eleventy-thousand centuries.

  5. 5.

    cain

    @Cheryl Rofer: ​
     
    Leaving unequivocally – what a concept! Maybe we can spend our trillions on ourselves instead!
    I’m sure blackwater, and all those other outfits will have a big sad.

  7. 7.

    Low Key Swagger

    I think the argument is to keep a smaller force in place (Or, an international force) until a deal is reached between the Afghan govt and the Taliban.  Pakistan is playing a role in that process but apparently it is painfully slow.

  8. 8.

    Another Scott

    A good decision, and the 20th anniversary is an appropriate milestone to finally make it happen, even with the (expected) carping from the usual suspects (Moscow Mitch apparently issued a statement that Jen was asked about (and batted away, saying she’s going to let Biden talk about it first)).

    I assume that we’ll have a strong embassy presence and will have lots of carrots to offer to help the existing and future governments make the transition – if they want them.  But ultimately, as always, the people there have to make up their own minds about what government they want and we cannot impose a solution on the parties.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  10. 10.

    Another Scott

    @Low Key Swagger: My (limited) understanding is that Pakistan has been such a thorn in the side of an Afghanistan solution for so long because they didn’t like Afghanistan’s potential / limited / actual ties with India.

    And the Afghani Taliban being completely different from the Pakistani Taliban and having different goals further complicated things.

    It was arguably appropriate for us to bloody-the-nose of the Afghan government after 9/11.  The idea that we could have some democratic client state there, without a perpetual war of pacification afterwards, was a dangerous fantasy.  We’re not the only country that has interests, and us getting played by regional powers was predictable…

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  11. 11.

    Betty Cracker

    @cain: From what I’ve read, the situation is already horrific for women and girls there since the US-backed government’s control doesn’t extend much past the urban areas. It will probably get even worse when the Taliban or some other brand of religious fanatics take over the country completely again, which might happen now. But like you said, they’ve got to figure it out for themselves. Maybe having foreign occupiers out will hasten rather than delay that process. I don’t know. It’s terrible. But staying there isn’t accomplishing anything and hasn’t for a very long time from what I can see.

  12. 12.

    Amir Khalid

    For a long time I believed this decision was obviously necessary — the US military presence hadn’t achieved anything useful since chasing Osama out of Afghanistan — but politically unfeasible. Obama wasn’t able to do it, for whatever reason. I’m glad Biden can.

  14. 14.

    Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)

    Sigh. All I can think about is those poor Afghan girls who have been able to go to school and how that could be cruelly ripped away from them by the Taliban. I suppose there’s not much else we can do at this point.

    Wonder how the Purity Left will react to this news? I’m sure the pikers will credit Trump for starting the ball rolling. Trump starting the withdrawal might make it politically embarrassing for Republicans to criticize the move as “cutting and running”, but Republicans are nothing if not shameless so we shall see

  15. 15.

    randal m sexton

    Yes I think this is the right decision but the consequences will be bad for many of the city folk of the country.

    Betty, can we refer to you as ‘TFB’ — The Former Brownie ?

  17. 17.

    Mike in NC

    Dubya and his henchmen gave us two horrifically expensive and endless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, yet the Republican Party basically paid no price whatsoever. Everything that happened over the past twenty years has been flushed down the national memory hole. U-S-A!

  19. 19.

    Bill K

    Our foray into Afghanistan always saddened me.  Anyone with a sense of history or geography should have seen what a nightmare it would be to occupy.  We should have just bombed the crap out of Al Qaida and the Taliban and then left.  But for some reason we decided to nation-build.  There was lots of flowery language about building a stable democracy and I actually started to wonder if we might be making a serious effort here.  After all, we are the richest country in the world.  We can do some amazing things when we put our backs in it.  But almost immediately we knee-capped the whole effort with the Iraq invasion.  Two wars of choice at the same time – both on the other side of the world.  I knew then we were destined to fail at both.  While stationed in the Middle East I got to watch as time and again resources got diverted from Afghanistan to Iraq.  I got to watch the death toll rise and the people’s hopes fade.  All while trillions of dollars went down the drain.  So kudos to Biden for ending at least part of this debacle.

  20. 20.

    West of the Rockies

    Things will go terrible for women and everyone who isn’t a fundamentalist,but as has been said, they need to figure out there own shit.

  23. 23.

    Adam L Silverman

    So there are three strategic considerations here. And they are all undergirded by how much risk President Biden and his team are willing to accept. These considerations are:

    1. What happens if we break the agreement the previous administration locks us into?
    2. What happens if we adhere the agreement the previous administration locks us into?
    3. Have we done what was necessary, or, perhaps, is it even possible to do what is necessary through our operations in Afghanistan to set the conditions to secure the peace once we withdraw?

    I think from the reporting we can pretty much conclude that Biden and his team ran the traps on the first two questions and concluded that honoring the agreement assumes less risk for the US, our allies and partners, and the region than breaking it. That doesn’t mean there isn’t any risk. I don’t for a moment think that the Taliban are going to be positive actors once we and our NATO allies withdraw. And I doubt anyone on the Biden nat-sec team is so naive as to think that either.

    The third question is the harder one to answer. Because it is, I think, abundantly clear that we have not done what was required, either on the battlefield or at the negotiating table or in advising and assisting or in doing political development and building infrastructure, to set the conditions to secure the peace once we withdraw. I also think it is abundantly clear that no matter who is doing the policy and strategy development, the planning, the analysis, etc regarding Afghanistan that we have in 2021 any real, let alone better idea of how to do this in Afghanistan. And that’s where the strategic rubber meets the operational reality road. The point of waging war is to establish conditions through the use of force to inflict so much pain on one’s opponent or opponents as to make them unable and/or unwilling to continue fighting that allow for one to secure the peace once fighting has concluded. I don’t know of anyone, including the Afghan subject matter experts I used to work with on this stuff, who have any good and/or realistic ideas how to do this vis a vis the Taliban.  And if you cannot do this and you are not going to simply stay some place as a third party counterinsurgent and peacemaking force for ever, then you don’t have an achievable strategic objective.

  24. 24.

    Brachiator

    The US obviously cannot stay in Afghanistan forever. But I don’t know that there is any such thing as Afghanistan working out its own problems. In Sri Lanka, for example, ultimately one side simply got crushed, and the rest of the world simply looked away because there was nothing to be done.

    Islamic fundamentalists in Afghanistan cannot tolerate the presence of women in the public sphere.

    From a March CNN News story:

    Three female media workers were shot dead in the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad on Tuesday, government officials said, amid a wave of killings that is spreading fear among professional workers in urban centers.

    Zalmai Latifi, head of local broadcaster Enikas TV, said the three women were recent high school graduates aged between 18 and 20 who worked in the station’s dubbing department.

    Government sources said the women were killed on their way home from work, and witnesses said gunmen shot the women in the head before fleeing. A fourth woman was injured, and a hospital spokesman said she had been admitted to hospital and was fighting for her life.

    Provincial police chief Juma Gul Hemat said that the suspected lead attacker had been arrested and that he was connected to the insurgent Taliban.

    A Taliban spokesman denied the group had any involvement in the attack.

    Maybe Pakistan and other nations in the region can provide some relief.  We shall see.

  26. 26.

    Another Scott

    @Adam L Silverman: Well said.

    I’ve thought for a while that with the ubiquitous availability of explosives and rifles and whatnot that wars of conquest are pretty-much impossible now.  Locals won’t stand for it for long.  While it sucks when outsiders are trying to help the good guys, and it means that “insurgencies” can last for decades, maybe, ultimately, it’s a good thing.  Bootsonaground doesn’t ultimately matter – outsiders won’t win.  So, if there’s a call for military action, maybe make the rubble bounce a few times then quit because anything more isn’t going to achieve a national objective for a price that an outside country is willing to pay….

    Imagine a DoD without an Army!!  ;-)

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  28. 28.

    trollhattan

    Shock headline for the ages, “Lindsey Graham scrambles history for nefarious purposes”

    Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) slammed President Biden’s plans to fully withdraw all troops from Afghanistan, calling the decision “dumber than dirt and devilishy dangerous,” The Hill reports.

    He added: “President Biden will have, in essence, cancelled an insurance policy against another 9/11.”

    Did you know having US military in Afghanistan insures us against being 9/11ed? Well now you do.

    Also, hearing him being alliterative is more than I can bear.

  29. 29.

    JMG

    If you haven’t won a war in 20 years, unlikely you’ll win it in 21. In fact, you probably lost it at least 10 years ago.

  32. 32.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Brachiator: The goal of any counter-revolution, counter-rebellion, counter-insurgency – so low intensity warfare operation – is to achieve one of two things:

    • Negotiated settlement
    • Clear victory

    When third parties, like the US, get involved, we are usually working towards a clear enough victory that allows a negotiated settlement to reconcile the sides of the conflicts to prevent further reignition of the conflict. We’ve clearly failed to be able to achieve this in Afghanistan and, frankly, I’m not sure it is possible.

    That said, what I want to see articulated the strategy for dealing with what happens once we and our allies withdraw and the inevitable happens. I want to know what the planning is for mitigation, for containment. For doing over the horizon counter-terrorism if necessary.

  34. 34.

    hueyplong

    Lindsey Graham constantly warns about an impending 9/11 whenever his party is out of the White House.

    When it’s in the White House, all 9/11s are unimaginable, unforeseeable tragedies about which it is obscene to play politics.

    At this point we can all write his tweets (with the occasional cross-up of unexpected alliteration).

  36. 36.

    cain

    @Adam L Silverman:

     

    That said, what I want to see articulated the strategy for dealing with what happens once we and our allies withdraw and the inevitable happens. I want to know what the planning is for mitigation, for containment. For doing over the horizon counter-terrorism if necessary.

    I expect a lot of spying going on..

  37. 37.

    New Deal democrat

    Ultimately the AUMF after 9/11 was supposed to be directed at those who were directly implicated in or aided and abetted the attacks.

    No 18 year old jihadi today was even alive in 2001. As far as I know, there is only one individual left who has not been accounted for: Ayman Mohammed Rabie al-Zawahiri.
    A manhunt for him in Afghanistan or elsewhere continues to be justified. Aside from that, the AUMF should be terminated by Congress.

  39. 39.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Another Scott: I provided some assessments for the Canadian general who was on the ISAF Command Staff back in 2009 that basically suggested that we need to stop focusing on the national level in Afghanistan and reorient our theater strategy to the local and regional levels within Afghanistan. Find ways to stabilize and then improve people’s lives at the local level while doing development at the local and regional levels in Afghanistan. Then reconcile these people back to the regional level which is, for a lot of people in Afghanistan, the highest level of government they’re ever going to deal with. Then once that’s working, work on getting the national government on sound footing and reconcile the regions to the national government with an emphasis remaining on the local and regional levels.

  40. 40.

    cain

    @Ramiah Ariya:

    Doesn’t seem that Modi’s govt is really interested too much in the U.S. anyways. India has their own problems and I”m wondering how the rise of Hindu right wing is going to work out when surrounded by Muslim countries.

  42. 42.

    clay

    Now hang on, here!  I was assured that Biden was a bloodthirsty warmonger who was personally responsible for every death in the Middle East for the last 20 years.  Something ain’t right.

  43. 43.

    James E Powell

    @Brachiator:

    In Sri Lanka, for example, ultimately one side simply got crushed, and the rest of the world simply looked away because there was nothing to be done.

    Isn’t that how most of these conflicts have been resolved throughout history? I’m not recommending or approving, just trying to recall a time when everybody sat down and made nice for the benefit of all.

  44. 44.

    Geminid

    Biden is choosing the best of bad options. This will likely be a very violent 4-1/2 months for Afghanistan and it’s people, but it would have been anyway. And the fighting won’t stop when we leave. I’m glad, though, that Biden thought past trump’s cynical May 1 withdrawal date.

    While I share peoples’ desire that we grant visas to those Afghani’s who are at risk, there won’t be enough visas to bring out more than a fraction of the people who will be threatened if and when the Taliban take over. Four million Hazaras were brutally repressed under Taliban rule. Next time round, the Taliban may go for outright extermination.

  45. 45.

    Amir Khalid

    @Brachiator:
    Unfortunately, the US military has never been particularly successful at protecting women in Afghanistan from fundamentalist crazies. I don’t think any external power could do that either.

  46. 46.

    Soprano2

    I’ve always thought conditions-based peace talks were a bad idea, because it gives those who don’t want peace too much leverage over you. OTOH, I always wondered why the Taliban didn’t just go along and quit blowing things up long enough for us to be able to leave. I do hate what this will do to women in Afghanistan – nothing good, I’m afraid. I also hope Biden allows them to make arrangements for everyone who helped us to come to the U.S. if they want to before we withdraw.

  47. 47.

    Gravenstone

    @trollhattan: Hey, I’m all for permanently stationing Lindsey and any other members of the war uber alles Republican cheerleading squad in some cozy little hovel in the middle of fucking nowhere Afghanistan. If they want a war that badly, let them wage it themselves.

  48. 48.

    Adam L Silverman

    @James E Powell: The only successful use of counterinsurgency to achieve a negotiated settlement in the modern period that I know of is Nepal. Several of the general officers who fought in that conflict became my students at USAWC when I was assigned there and I learned a ton from them about what does and does not work and the differences between first party and third party counterinsurgency.

  49. 49.

    CaseyL

    If the UW government and military haven’t managed to achieve any of its desired outcomes in 20 years, then the time to get out was 10 years ago. I welcome the end of our military presence in Afghanistan.

    I’d like to see the US get out of the Mid-East altogether (yes, including Israel) because getting involved has done nothing good and wasted hundreds of thousands of lives, not to mention trillions of dollars.

    As for the GQP bleating about it…fuck them sideways with a rusty saw. The GQP is functionally illiterate, and entirely corrupt- they probably want US forces to remain in Afghanistan because they’ve been fattening off the military contracts.

  51. 51.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Soprano2: Conditions based works if you are able to both bring sufficient force to bear on your opponent and you actually have a plan to successfully do so, so that your opponent would prefer to negotiate rather than endure more pain.

    We were unwilling to do the former in Afghanistan because we did not have a good understanding of the latter and, perhaps more importantly, we know that conducting a Malaya style of counterinsurgency is no longer an acceptable strategic option.

  53. 53.

    trollhattan

    @clay:

    “Bo Biden served in Iraq and yet did not defeat the Taliban. Why does Joe Biden continue to ignore his responsibility in this failure?”

  54. 54.

    James E Powell

    @New Deal democrat:

    As far as I know, there is only one individual left who has not been accounted for: Ayman Mohammed Rabie al-Zawahiri.

    Do we have any idea who is keeping that guy safe and giving him money?

  55. 55.

    hueyplong

    @Ksmiami: “after 500,000+ dead as the result of Republicans, I don’t give a shit about Lindsey Graham’s opinions”

    I didn’t require a nasty body count in order to dismiss Graham’s opinions.  Just said we could write his texts, not that we should.  They’re generic, low-level GOP trough material.

  57. 57.

    Another Scott

    Biden is committing himself to an Afghanistan withdrawal. There’s an open briefing with the intelligence chiefs tomorrow in the Senate. Very curious which GOP senators will hit the MAGA button and which will hit the Neocon button.

    — Spencer Ackerman (@attackerman) April 13, 2021

    Yet another opportunity to root for injuries.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  59. 59.

    Brachiator

    @Adam L Silverman:

    When third parties, like the US, get involved, we are usually working towards a clear enough victory that allows a negotiated settlement to reconcile the sides of the conflicts to prevent further reignition of the conflict. We’ve clearly failed to be able to do achieve this in Afghanistan and, frankly, I’m not sure it is possible.

    Totally agree.

    In Afghanistan, there were not just humanitarian and other concerns which led the US to try to help do nation building.

    There was the practical concern that the Taliban would give aid and support to other extremist organizations.

    This problem might arise again.

    Pakistan has an interest in trying to insure stability in the region. They may have concerns that Afghan and Pakistan based Taliban forces might pose a threat to Pakistan. Then you might have regional instability and fear that Pakistan, worse case scenario, might lose control of its nuclear weapons. I think this is extremely unlikely, but who knows how Pakistan might be shaken.

    This does not argue for the US staying in the region. It just says that the world may have to deal with inevitable increase in regional instability as best it can.

  60. 60.

    lowtechcyclist

    Now it is not good for the Christian’s health to hustle the Aryan brown,
    For the Christian riles, and the Aryan smiles, and he weareth the Christian down;
    And the end of the fight is a tombstone white with the name of the late deceased,
    And the epitaph drear: “A Fool lies here who tried to hustle the East.”

    -Kipling

  63. 63.

    trollhattan

    @Brachiator:

    Does Pakistan no longer allow the Taliban to operate on their side of the border with Afghanistan? Seem to recall they once tolerated/encouraged their presence.

  66. 66.

    gvg

    We really do need to get our allies out and honor agreements. Republicans will scream about it and we need to fight back against their hysteria. Respond with the honor of the US is at stake.

    People measure based on earned reputation. Once Bush screwed things up beyond repair by dividing our forces and putting incompetents in charge of rebuilding plus using torture……we had already lost. I really hoped Obama could get us out, especially after he got Osama Bin Laden. I just don’t think there was any hope after those major errors. Maybe there was before then under a competent President.

    We shouldn’t have gone into Iraq of course.  But I always felt that we had no alternative but a significant attack after the prior Government of Afghanistan refused to give up or expel the 911 attackers. We couldn’t overlook that. But the nation building…was poorly thought out.

  67. 67.

    Ken

    I thought the traditional plan was “Declare victory and get out,” but I suppose that’s too much of a stretch this time.

  68. 68.

    Brachiator

    @James E Powell:

    In Sri Lanka, for example, ultimately one side simply got crushed, and the rest of the world simply looked away because there was nothing to be done.

    Isn’t that how most of these conflicts have been resolved throughout history? I’m not recommending or approving, just trying to recall a time when everybody sat down and made nice for the benefit of all.

    I suppose. This is why, I guess, we should shut down the United Nations, close international humanitarian organizations and say, “tough shit if things work out badly for you.”

    If any refugees turn up on our borders, should we just turn them away or shoot them?

  70. 70.

    Poe Larity

    If only W Bush had listened to himself about his campaign disdain for “liberal’s nation building.” Or perhaps he never saw the Princess Bride.

    Or maybe it wasn’t god who spoke to him.

  71. 71.

    Mike in NC

    Lindsey Graham ran for president boasting about his military background. In fact, he was an Air Force Reserve lawyer who hardly wore the uniform at all over the past 20 years. That gives him zero credibility on the subject. On the other hand, would love to see him recalled to active duty and sent on a one-way mission to the Hindu Kush.

  72. 72.

    Roger Moore

    @Goku (aka Amerikan Baka): ​
     

    Wonder how the Purity Left will react to this news? I’m sure the pikers will credit Trump for starting the ball rolling.

    Trump will get the credit for getting the withdrawal started. Biden will get the blame for all the bad stuff the Taliban does when they take over.

  73. 73.

    Brachiator

    @trollhattan:

    Does Pakistan no longer allow the Taliban to operate on their side of the border with Afghanistan? Seem to recall they once tolerated/encouraged their presence.

    Complicated game. The Pakistan intelligence service, which operates at times independent of the government, sometimes tries to “handle” the Taliban, with inconsistent results.

  74. 74.

    Omnes Omnibus

    For those who had complained about the Biden Admin’s previous hesitancy about about meeting TFG’s agreed date and who said we should just leave, this is what just leaving looks like when it is done responsibly.

  75. 75.

    StringOnAStick

    Sometimes there are no good options remaining, and maybe there never were any but they are definitely gone by now, by 10 years ago, who knows.  I’m sad for the women and girls in Afghanistan and I hope many can escape to other countries.  I’m also sad for the families of all people on all sides who have died in this conflict, and for the family that will have the unfortunate honor of having their loved one be the last US or NATO soldier killed in Afghanistan.

  76. 76.

    Cermet

    Glad this seemingly forever war will finally end; and yes, the rump very much helped made this possible. Glad President Biden agreed and yes, a smoother transition makes us look better but really will make zero difference to the final outcome. Just hope no further US soldiers are killed but getting out is all that really matters. This is the second best news (after the vaccine) we’d had this new year.

  77. 77.

    Amir Khalid

    @Ken:
    The only realistic option is to admit defeat and get out. For nearly two decades the US has been stuck in Afghanistan with no achievable objectives. It cannot make peace among the warring factions. It cannot realistically protect anyone from fundamentalists. It cannot stand up a viable nation. Its least-bad oprion is to leave. Yes, it’s a major embarrassment to leave in these circumstances, but there is nothing the US can achieve by staying.

  80. 80.

    Mike G

    Are we going to hear a buttload of moronic Bush\Cheney chest-thumping bullshit from Republicans?

    “Don’t wanna CUT AND RUN!!”

    “Don’t let the terrists win!!”

    “Stay the course!!!”

    Nobody could have expected that running foreign policy like a junior-high football locker room would turn out badly.

  84. 84.

    bnatebuckeye

    Wait, my Libertarian friend posted all these memes about how Biden wants war because the Pentagon’s budget proposal was a little higher than TFG…

  85. 85.

    cain

    @Brachiator: Interesting question. Their stock position is that everyone but them are warmongers.

    I reckon they are just as willing to enter a war for the right war. Everyone’s war is “special” and super duper important.

  86. 86.

    Amir Khalid

    @Dorothy A. Winsor:
    Unfortunately, the US has never had the influence on Afghan society or politics, or the military control of the country, to adequately protect Afghan women and girls. Leaving now may look like abandoning them, but I don’t think it will make much difference to their safety or lack of it.​

  87. 87.

    Adam L Silverman

    @raven: Without a doubt. We’ll see a replay of 2009-2011. A Republican administration negotiates the US into having to do withdraw. Then it was Iraq because the Bush 43 screwed up the SOFA negotiations. Now it is whatever the actual details are of what the Trump people negotiated. A Democrat is elected. Then Obama, now Biden. And they adhere to what the previous Republican administration agreed to. What they agreed to, of course, actually made things worse and when worse happens, the Republicans in the House and the Senate and the conservatives at the various think tanks and interest organizations start screaming and yelling and shrieking and wailing that the Democratic president is betraying the troops and America and our allies and something must be done immediately!

    That’s what Graham’s signaling with his statement. It doesn’t matter that all Obama in 2010 and Biden now is doing is adhering to what the Republican president’s Graham slavishly supported agreed the US would do. All that matters to Graham and his ilk is that they can use this, as well as the American military and host country nationals lives, as props to score political points.

  89. 89.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Brachiator: The Girl Scouts are well funded, organized hierarchically, and have uniforms that blend into most environments. I suggest we recognize them for what they are: America’s 8th uniformed service and that we deploy them accordingly…

  91. 91.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Mike G: Megan McCain is likely to tell the other ladies on The View tomorrow that she is “Senator McCain’s daughter”.

  95. 95.

    James E Powell

    @Brachiator:

    Did you miss the part where I said I wasn’t recommending or approving? Are the only two choices invasion/occupation or shut down the United Nations, etc?

    In the example you mentioned, Sri Lanka, you said there was nothing to be done. Should someone have done something anyway? If so, what?

  96. 96.

    Kropacetic

    @rp: “So I guess Biden doesn’t care about the Taliban oppressing women? Typical democrat…all talk, no action!”

    Do we get to pay more attention to oppressing our own women* less now?

    *or anyone else?

  97. 97.

    Adam L Silverman

    @trollhattan: Trust me, they’re not stockpiling cookies with the proceeds from their cookie sales…

    I’m now activating my exfil plan as I’ve said too much!//

  100. 100.

    James E Powell

    @Mike in NC:

    Lindsey Graham ran for president boasting about his military background. In fact, he was an Air Force Reserve lawyer who hardly wore the uniform at all over the past 20 years.

    The Beltway Courtiers give military/foreign policy cred to just about anyone who makes bellicose speeches.

  101. 101.

    Roger Moore

    @Brachiator:

    Pakistan has an interest in trying to insure stability in the region.

    Pakistan has an interest in regional stability, but they also see Afghanistan as a possible vassal state and strategic advantage in their conflict with India.  I am pretty sure which of those interests will predominate.

  102. 102.

    Betty Cracker

    @Another Scott:

    Very curious which GOP senators will hit the MAGA button and which will hit the Neocon button.

    That will be interesting. Graham already hit the Neocon button like an exhausted lab rat jonesing for one more pellet. I suppose some Republicans will manage to criticize the exit from both points of view. It’s not like MAGA is a coherent doctrine that explicitly rejects Neoconism anyway. Like its originator, it’s a shape-shifting entity in search of targets of opportunity.

  104. 104.

    Geminid

     

    @Dorothy A. Winsor: We are not neccessarily handing the country over to the Taliban. trump’s plan, if you can call it that, would have. The government forces must have some fighting capability, or else the Taliban would have taken all the country by now. We curtailed air support to government forces last year, and left air support to the small Afgani air force. That has changed since the Biden administration took over, and as long as the Taliban do not make an effort to settle this war in good faith, we are likely to see an intensified U.S. air campaign against them. And the Taliban will certainly attack U.S. forces. It will be a violent time until September and beyond.

    And the women and girls, half the population as you point out, will have almost no say in the outcome.

  105. 105.

    Ken

    @trollhattan: One of countless ways Libertarians are weird is desire for a kickass military that doesn’t cost money.

    It would be handled on a subscription service. Everyone would pay for as much military as they wanted, or thought they would need. There would also be competing militaries and you could choose which one(s) you wanted to support, which would help drive prices down thanks to The Market.

  106. 106.

    cain

    @Adam L Silverman: ​
     

    That’s what Graham’s signaling with his statement. It doesn’t matter that all Obama in 2010 and Biden now is doing is adhering to what the Republican president’s Graham slavishly supported agreed the US would do. All that matters to Graham and his ilk is that they can use this, as well as the American military and host country nationals lives, as props to score political points.

    I believe this is called business as usual and the usual cycle of abuse that we have been seeing since the 90s.

  107. 107.

    Ruckus

    @Betty Cracker:

    This comment really says it all.

    We can stay at war till there aren’t any cows to come home or we can realize that this is not our country and we can’t force people to just accept our ideals/concepts, especially when we as a country have just shown that our citizens do not all accept the same ideals/concepts.

  108. 108.

    raven

    @cain: The 90’s ? Ever hear of “who lost China”

     

    The “loss of China” was portrayed by critics of the Truman Administration as an “avoidable catastrophe”.[6] It led to a “rancorous and divisive debate” and the issue was exploited by the Republicans at the polls in 1952.[7] It also played a large role in the rise of Joseph McCarthy,[8] who, with his allies, sought scapegoats for that “loss”, targeting notably Owen Lattimore, an influential scholar of Central Asia.[9]

  109. 109.

    SiubhanDuinne

    @Betty Cracker:

    Graham already hit the Neocon button like an exhausted lab rat jonesing for one more pellet.

    Am never ever going to be able to see Graham again without flashing on this image. Just [chef’s kiss mwah!] perfection, Betty.

  110. 110.

    randy khan

    I just bubbled to the top of the list for a vaccine appointment!  Sunday morning, about half an hour away from my house.  I am unduly excited.

  111. 111.

    cain

    @Roger Moore: ​
     

    Pakistan has an interest in regional stability, but they also see Afghanistan as a possible vassal state and strategic advantage in their conflict with India. I am pretty sure which of those interests will predominate.

    Yeah, good luck with that – I don’t see Afghanistan planning to do anything of the sort. Which is exactly why they’ve been making overtures to India as a way to say “yeah, we got other friends too” –

    Although, with all that anti-Muslim shit going on, I wonder if the relationship will be like Israel and Saudi Arabia – now there is a relationship that is puzzling.

  112. 112.

    cain

    @raven: ​
     

    @cain: The 90’s ? Ever hear of “who lost China”?

    I thought Nixon made it alllll better? Even put a band-aid and kissed the ouchie.

  113. 113.

    WaterGirl

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    For those who had complained about the Biden Admin’s previous hesitancy about about meeting TFG’s agreed date and who said we should just leave, this is what just leaving looks like when it is done responsibly.

    Absolutely!  I hope this also gives us time to get those who helped us out of the country.

  115. 115.

    Ruckus

    @Adam L Silverman:

    IOW, create a nation state, rather than a geographic state.
    I’ve also wondered how it would be possible to create a nation state with a significant amount of the people in complete disagreement with the concepts of a viable nation state. As you say the Taliban are insane.

  119. 119.

    Adam L Silverman

    @raven: This is why Jeb! Bush’s battle cry when playing tennis and what he tells proteges and others when he’s trying to get them fired up is “Release Chiang!”.

  120. 120.

    Adam L Silverman

    @Ruckus: The intention was to work around the Taliban as much as possible for all the non-kinetic work. Basically create something on the continuum between a congery and a confederation rooted within the local contexts. Easy for me to write into a strategic assessment than it is to both get someone way up the chain to authorize, let alone implement.

  121. 121.

    Geminid

    @cain: I think the relationship between Israel and Saudi Arabia can be explained by their common fear of Iran. And the Saudis got fed up with the Palestinian leadership long ago. They and the Gulf states that now have relations with Israel seem to have decided that they will no longer support maximal Palestinian aspirations. They want the Palestinians to take what they can get, and stop being a problem.

  122. 122.

    Ruckus

    @gvg:

    The nation planning was as bad as every other form of planning that our conservative side has com up with over the last 20 years

  123. 123.

    Adam L Silverman

    @raven: Frank Burns has entered the chat…

  124. 124.

    Brachiator

    @Adam L Silverman:

    The Girl Scouts are well funded, organized hierarchically, and have uniforms that blend into most environments. I suggest we recognize them for what they are: America’s 8th uniformed service and that we deploy them accordingly…

    Just recently re-watched the movie “Airplane.” In one scene, girl scouts are the roughest brawlers in a dingy gin joint.

  125. 125.

    Ken

    @Adam L Silverman: I’m trying to remember, is it Afghanistan that has an expat community living somewhere in the Gulf states, and that promotes itself as being important despite having approximately as much influence in Afghanistan as I do?  I remember some group along those lines, and that they had some not-completely-flattering nickname, like “Beach Afghans” (though googling that only turns up knitting patterns).

    Anyway, your mention of trying to get buy-in from Afghani factions reminded me of them.

  126. 126.

    New Deal democrat

    @James E Powell: I haven’t heard anything about him in probably a decade.

    As for whether maybe the Saudis have been helping him, I know nothing and don’t want to venture an opinion.

  127. 127.

    Roger Moore

    @cain: ​
     

    Yeah, good luck with that – I don’t see Afghanistan planning to do anything of the sort.

    But there is no “Afghanistan” planning on doing anything. There are different factions in Afghanistan’s ongoing civil war, and Pakistan just needs to support one it thinks will be a thorn in India’s side.

  128. 128.

    jonas

    @Mike in NC: Electorally, you’re certainly correct. In any rational world, having an R next to your name should have been a kiss of political death after the W maladministration and its bungled military adventurism. What happened, however, is that Republicans banished the hawkish neoconservatives from the party, embraced TFG, and rebranded themselves as a jingoistic white nationalist party with a penchant for corrupt autocrats and allergy to nation-building military interventions. Ka-ching! The neocon establishment *is* in the political desert now, but not in the way we, or they, might have anticipated.

  131. 131.

    cain

    @Geminid: I’m wondering when the Palestinians are gonna get sick of Hamas – those jokers seem to prefer endless war instead of trying to figure out how to incrementally get what they want. But they are ideologues and you can’t negotiate with those kinds of people.

  133. 133.

    cain

    @Ruckus:

     

    The nation planning was as bad as every other form of planning that our conservative side has com up with over the last 20 years

    Hey I learned all my nation building using Civilization. I mean I got a plan already to take over Afghanistan. I’m an expert!

  135. 135.

    JMG

    Some years ago I was reading a Guardian article about an upsurge of street crime, mostly muggings and purse snatchings, in Barcelona. One detail was that one prominent victim was the Afghan ambassador to Spain, who was robbed of a 20,000 buck Rolex. I sincerely doubt this was an honest civil servant. The US supported government has had two decades to build a competent or at least honest government and has failed. That’s not our fault.

  136. 136.

    cain

    @Roger Moore: ​
     

    But there is no “Afghanistan” planning on doing anything. There are different factions in Afghanistan’s ongoing civil war, and Pakistan just needs to support one it thinks will be a thorn in India’s side.

    India can do the same. Hell, even Iran can probably do something as well. We can continue to fuck around and find out what happens. The group that gets the most money is gonna eventually be able to build out a enclave that they can hopefully defend.
    Eventually someone is going to end up as the real Slim Shady.

  139. 139.

    Comrade Colette

    @randy khan: Hurrah! And I don’t think any level of excitement should be considered undue – that’s really a big Biden deal! Wishing you minimal side effects and maximal antibodies.

  140. 140.

    Adam L Silverman

    @cain: Hamas’s influence is basically limited to the Gaza Strip. And, frankly, if most Americans or anyone else actually understood the reality of what life is like in the Gaza Strip it would suddenly make a lot more sense why the Palestinians that live there would tolerate and support Hamas.

  142. 142.

    Roger Moore

    @Ruckus: ​
     

    I’ve also wondered how it would be possible to create a nation state with a significant amount of the people in complete disagreement with the concepts of a viable nation state.

    Making a nation state is a slow, painful, bloody business. It took the countries we now think of as these wonderful, natural nations, like France and Italy, centuries to amalgamate and forge their national identities from disparate parts. Even today those things are not 100% complete, which is why you have Basque separatists and The Northern League.

  143. 143.

    cain

    @JMG: This is why it has to come from within – those people are just making money off of a foreign power.

    If the factions in Afghanistan want to change they will.. but right now they are just tribal people trying to make it work and maybe that’s enough for them now.

  144. 144.

    Jay

    @cain:

    there is no “Afghanistan”. There are a variety of ethnic/tribal groups that sometimes work together, sometimes fight, and another variety of ethic/tribal/religious groups that believe they have the right to rule all Afghanistan.

    Every group has an outside “sponsor” of a sorts. Russia, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Iran, India, Pakistan, possibly now China.

    As a result, for example, Pakistan’s attempts to drag Afghanistan to their side in the India/Pakistan conflict had it’s most success under the pre-9/11 Taliban, but as it was pre-Taliban, it has been reduced down again to the border areas with Pakistan.

    Iran’s influence has always stopped at Herat.

    In Afghanistan, regional actor’s influence usually stops right at the end of the local trade routes.

    The agreement is with the “Beach Talibs”, all of whom have been living in the UAE on their dime for over a decade. They have little to no control over the “fighting” Taliban in Afghanistan, who are not a monolithic bloc, but instead, a collection of regional Warlords, who’s key focus is what is happening in their valley, district or province.

    and ISIS and various Al Quida allied factions are still active and control ground in Afghanistan.

  145. 145.

    Brachiator

    @Roger Moore:

    Pakistan has an interest in regional stability, but they also see Afghanistan as a possible vassal state and strategic advantage in their conflict with India.

    Pakistan has never been able to control the Taliban or other tribes within its own borders. There is no fantasy in which Afghanistan becomes a vassal state.

    I also don’t see any strategic advantage in conflicts with India. Nukes aside, Pakistan has generally been a weak opponent with respect to India. In fact, I would argue that the conflicts have been a waste of time, and have ended up with Pakistan squandering its resources without achieving any meaningful result.

    The Indo-Pakistan War of 1971, for example, was a major defeat for Pakistan. As was noted:

    In the words of one Pakistani author, “Pakistan lost half its navy, a quarter of its air force and a third of its army”.

    US support for Pakistan in the post WW2 era, stupidly assuming that India would become more aligned with the old Soviet Union, allowed Pakistan to divert more resources to the military and to pretend that it was evenly matched with India.

    The 1999 war was more limited, but again Pakistan got its ass kicked.

    They are very slow learners. Worse, they work against their own best interests. The sad thing is that currently India’s tilt into nationalistic bullshit confirms Pakistan’s old paranoia and finally gives it some basis.

  146. 146.

    Ken

    @cain: Hey I learned all my nation building using Civilization. I mean I got a plan already to take over Afghanistan. I’m an expert!

    Send wave after wave of diplomats to sabotage production, bribe units to defect, and eventually subvert whole cities?

  147. 147.

    Bob7094

    anyone who ever read Kipling knows better than to try to occupy Afghanistan.

    Or Flashman by George MacDonald Fraser

  149. 149.

    The Pale Scot

    @Another Scott:

    the ubiquitous availability of explosives and rifles and whatnot that wars of conquest are pretty-much impossible now

    Cellphones, AKs and IEDs are all one needs to keep things in perpetual chaos as long as the population supports or is cowed into submission

    @ Adam,

    How can we bring out all the people who want to leave? In my dreams all the women and girls are given the chance to make that decision. Leave the males to all be Quran thumping incels.

    I guess we’d have to pull out all the boys too. Give ’em Idaho to settle, let the Neo-nazis there chew on that one

  150. 150.

    Jay

    @Brachiator:

    both India and Pakistan stupidly got nukes.

    When nukes are involved, you can’t win a war, or seize territory.

    The best you get is the status quo, performative “victories” and lots of bloodloss.

  152. 152.

    PJ

    @JMG: ​
      A whole lot of it is the fault of the US. After the collapse of the Taliban in 2001, a lot of the population was looking forward to a country free of the Taliban’s repression along with stability and law and order (the latter of which the Taliban had provided, which was why they won in the ’90s.) But the US had no interest in providing stability and law and order, just in hunting down “terrorists” (most of whom were not terrorists, but saps turned in for the bounty) to be tortured and maybe sent to Gitmo. If the US had spent the money and effort that went into the Iraq War on rebuilding and stabilizing Afghanistan, it would have been a different story.

  153. 153.

    Geminid

    @cain: Actually, the Israelis do negotiate with Hamas through third parties like Egypt and Qatar. The two adversaries have an uneasy truce. Some observers point out that with Hamas in the picture Israel benefits from a politically divided Palestinian people. But neither Hamas nor the Palestinian authority allow much freedom to those under their authority. There are Palestinian elections scheduled for June, though, but they might not happen.

  155. 155.

    Ken

    @M31: “Supreme Troopleader, the enemy have destroyed their weapons and crawled across the broken glass to lie prostrate at the foot of your throne and pledge their eternal devotion.”

    “You may give them each one Thin Mint as a reward.”

  156. 156.

    The Pale Scot

    @CaseyL:

    I’d like to see the US get out of the Mid-East altogether

    Unfortunately, Keeping oil priced exclusively in dollars is the never mentioned reason for being there. I you don’t need dollars to buy oil, the goes most of the reason for “reserve currency” status. Throw in the rapture ready christianists beliefs about Israel’s role in the BIG ENDING.

  157. 157.

    Another Scott

    @PJ: It’s nice to think so, but I don’t agree.  Too many people there and in the region dislike invaders no matter how good their intentions, and getting them all to surrender was never an option.  How would we have liked it if the Chinese had invaded the USA to depose TFG, rebuild highways, and re-educate RWNJs??

    Things might have been better if Iraq hadn’t happened, but the various warlords and tribes would still be fighting to get us out either way.

    My $0.02.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  158. 158.

    Adam L Silverman

    @The Pale Scot: We can’t. Even if the Trump administration hadn’t gutted our refugee program, if Biden even suggested it, the political outcry would be tsunami like.

  159. 159.

    Jay

    @PJ:

    there was a window when the Talibs and allied groups, took the Amnesty, went home, cosmolined their weapons, buried them, and awaited the results of “Nation Building”.

    The tactics, flawed strategy, bad intel, horrible tactics and the settling of grudges employed in “The Hunt for Bin Laden” made too many of them targets.

    As could have been predicted, they dug up their weapons again.

  161. 161.

    The Pale Scot

    @Another Scott:

    Why do I feel that some GQPers are going to try to discretely create/support an Afghani group that declares terrorism in the US is its goal is not out of the realm of possibility. I sure Prince etc has the connections to try something like that

  162. 162.

    M31

    @Ken:

    [scruffy bearded warlords from all over at the bargaining table]

    Head Girl Scout strides in, sash with more badges than a North Korean general, slapping a cellophane-wrapped tube in her hand, “OK guys, wrap this up the right way and there’s a case of Thin Mints in the freezer for each of you”

  164. 164.

    Jay

    @Another Scott:

    at the First Loya Jurga, it was proposed by Tribal Elders, Reformers and Activists, that a new form of Afghan Government be formed, based provincially around Tribal Elders and reforms, and nationally, around a form of Loya Jurga.

    And that none of the Warlords and their “Political Parties” be allowed to hold power.

    In Dubya Dubya Me Too’s rush to invade Iraq, Afghanistan was instead, handed back over to the same Warlords, War Criminals and Drug Dealers, who had torn it apart after the Soviets were forced out.

    and College Republicans.

  166. 166.

    Cheryl from Maryland

    @Adam L Silverman: As a member of the Girl Scouts for 8 years (albeit decades ago), I am totally ready for this.  When I was a Girl Scout in the 1970s, the organization was progressive.  It is still progressive — that the Boy Scouts are working to invade our territory sucks.  We were able to wear pants to the meetings, had physical activities EVERY meeting, had non-traditional female badges (I earned one in aviation).  Besides, everyone should be able to cook, clean, and do laundry.  Also, DEPLOY COOKIES!

  167. 167.

    Brachiator

    @Jay:

    both India and Pakistan stupidly got nukes.

    No real argument with you here. They are now in the same stupid club with France and the UK, and probably Israel. The club that North Korea may be trying to get into. Makes a country feel big and strong.

    ETA: And yeah, I wish that all countries got rid of their nukes.

  168. 168.

    The Pale Scot

    @Another Scott:

    Why do I feel that some GQPers are going to try to discretely create/support an Afghani group that declares terrorism in the US is its goal is not out of the realm of possibility. I sure Prince etc has the connections to try something like that

  169. 169.

    Jay

    @Brachiator:

    France and the UK got nukes as a tripwire, not trusting that when push came to shove, that the US would use it’s nukes in their defence.

    India got nukes because China got nukes, so Pakistan had to get nukes.

    Stupid waste of money.

  171. 171.

    Cheryl from Maryland

    @Bob7094: I started reading the Flashman books in high school (I was intrigued by the Barbarossa covers) and then was able to ace several European History courses in college based on them alone.  As well as laughing myself silly.  It’s a great shame Mr. Fraser did not write his Flashy Civil War book and that he turned out to be the equivalent of a FoxBot at the end of his life.

  172. 172.

    Another Scott

    @Jay: I don’t remember the process being so clear-cut. There was strong factionalism from the beginning.

    CrisisGroup (from May 2002):

    The Loya Jirga process, which has been underway for several months, is challenged by: 1) a highly volatile security environment characterised by deepening factional tensions and a lack of common goals; 2) under-resourcing, unfamiliarity and an unclear agenda; and 3) an international community that has sometimes been working at cross-purposes when it needs to apply precise and unified pressure if there is to be a positive outcome.

    The key expectation for the Loya Jirga on the part of most Afghans and the international community is that it will correct the ethnic imbalance produced at the Bonn conference that has created an Interim Authority dominated by ethnic Tajik members of the Northern Alliance. But a broadly acceptable, balanced outcome is far from certain. In the lead-up to the Loya Jirga, an intense power-struggle is occurring at the local, regional, national, and international levels to shape and/or subvert the outcome. Few outcomes seem broadly acceptable. For example, there will be deep Pashtun discontent if Zahir Shah, is excluded, and the security ministries (defence and interior) stay in the hands of the Panshiri faction of the Shura-i-Nazar. Similarly, a strong role for the ex-king and a loss of key posts may be unacceptable to the Shura-i-Nazar and important former Northern Alliance constituencies. These divergent interests may be on a collision course that it will take immense pressure and compromise to avoid.

    Meanwhile, the goal of centralisation of the government, with emphasis on security functions, has hardly progressed. With the international coalition’s war against the Taliban and al-Qaeda still progressing, there is little hope that local and regional commanders will soon be downsized. Indeed, the exact opposite appears to be occurring not only among Coalition-supported commanders, but all across the country. Inter-factional armed confrontations also appear to be on the rise, with recent fighting reported in the south-east (Gardez), north (Sar-i-Pul), and centre (Lal) of the country.

    Attackerman’s September 2011 Wired piece is interesting:

    […]

    The Times of London — whose website is annoying — reports that by the end of the year, the Taliban will have a “political headquarters” open in Doha to conduct its affairs. That’s a big deal: the Taliban are under United Nations sanctions, a remnant of the post-9/11 solidarity with the U.S., obligating member-states to freeze their assets and harass their leadership. (Never mind Pakistan’s sponsorship of the Taliban.) The Doha office appears to be a workaround.

    The idea is for the Taliban to have a place to work outside of the pressures of the war — and far from Pakistani influence. The way U.S. diplos think about it, it wouldn’t be a new safe haven to fundraise or plot more insurgent attacks. (Enforced, uh, how?) And don’t call it an “embassy,” even though that’s what it sounds like, says a “Western diplomat” quoted by the Times. It’s a “residence where they can be treated like a political party.”

    Whatever. Ten years of war have proven that the Taliban don’t stay vanquished, no matter how tough the U.S. talks, leaving a negotiated settlement as perhaps the only possible end to the war. And another newly-disclosed memo from the Bush administration from the immediate aftermath of 9/11 may help explain why.

    “The U.S. should not commit to any post-Taliban military involvement,” reads a Pentagon strategy memo from October 30, 2001, (.PDF) “since the U.S. will be heavily engaged in the anti-terrorism effort world wide.” As it turned out, the U.S. kept a rump force of around 20,000 troops in Afghanistan after the downfall of the Taliban, badly coordinated with NATO forces out of an ideological distaste for “peacekeeping” missions. The end result: a lot of time and space for the “pillars of the Taliban regime” to pull off a violent second act.

    (The October 2001 PDF seems to be a dead link at the National Security Archive.)

    FWIW.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  173. 173.

    cain

    @Ken:

     

    Send wave after wave of diplomats to sabotage production, bribe units to defect, and eventually subvert whole cities?

    oh.. is that what you do? Dammit.. I need to come up with something like that. I was just gonna keep building cities and military till I take over the rest of the area!

  174. 174.

    Ruckus

    @Adam L Silverman:

    Sorry am at work today, late getting back to you.

    So is anything resembling a reasonable government of some/any type feasible with an actually insane, heavily armed posse?

    My response to that question would be a resounding no.

  175. 175.

    cain

    @Geminid:

    As I said – at some point they are going to get fed up. I mean, what advantage have they had for the past 60 years? Has anything improved? At some point, you might have to think that it might also be your own people who don’t know what the fuck they are doing. They are still losing land to these asshole settlers.

  176. 176.

    Ruckus

    @Roger Moore:

    Oh I fully understand. Hell, we’ve been here as a country fo for almost what, 250 years, and we still have people who seem to be looking to form a religious monarchy. Of course it’s not one religion, nor any kind of unified concept, just a bunch of pinheads being paid to create more stupidity so some can continue to rob the place blind. We supposedly had this under control 50-60 years ago, but the current version of the republican party was formed and that party was over.

  177. 177.

    Jay

    @Another Scott:

    I never said it would have been easy.

    Handing control to the NA in the immediate aftermath, just to reduce “Boots on the Ground”, was stupid.

    Can’t disarm the NA factions now, they run most of “Afghan Government Controlled Area’s” as their own little extort/drug trade kingdoms.

    Any attempt at reform, ( eg the Election bs) and Heavy D just laughs and laughs.

  178. 178.

    Bill Arnold

    @Ken: ​

    There would also be competing militaries and you could choose which one(s) you wanted to support, which would help drive prices down thanks to The Market.

    Lots of opportunities for market manipulation, too.

  180. 180.

    Brachiator

    @Jay:

    France and the UK got nukes as a tripwire, not trusting that when push came to shove, that the US would use it’s nukes in their defence.

    It was more the last gasp of nations that were no longer pre-eminent. Is there really such a thing as using nukes in defence if the world ends up splattered?

  181. 181.

    Geminid

    @cain: I imagine Palestinians have been fed up with their leaders for a long time. But I don’t think Hamas or the PA would tolerate any kind of organized dissent or rival power center. The Palestinian Authority is compromised by the venality of many of its members, and it’s power is backed up by Israeli security forces- so long as it is compliant. So it does little to oppose unauthorized land-grabs by Israeli settlers that are made possible by the unequal justice Irael imposes on what was designated as Area C by the Oslo Accords.

    I recently read Michael Oren’s book on the 1967 Six Day War. Oren spent a lot of time on the diplomatic story before, during and after the war. As Oren said, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the larger Israeli conflict with the Arab Middle East, have been essentially frozen since that war. Egypt made a cool peace in 1979, and Jordan did in 1992, and these are important exceptions.

    Last years developments between Israel, the U.A.E. and other nations may be the start of progress. trump hogged the credit, but these breakthroughs, if they are breakthroughs, have been over a decade in the making.

    That’s why I like President Biden and his administration’s approach. They have renewed funding for Palestinians, and reaffirmed U.S. support both for a two-state solution and for Israel’s security. They are not pressing hard for a settlement, though, but are letting a changed situation evolve. It still may take years to reach a comprehensive settlement, but it took decades for these conflicts to even start to thaw.

  182. 182.

    piratedan

    while I am happy to the idea that we’re leaving the region to its residents, I hope that conversely, anyone who wants to leave and start over in the US is allowed to do so.  I continually loathe the thought that we show up, get people to help us and then we abandon them.  If they worked with us and want to come to the US, fine, let them.  They want to bring their families so that they aren’t held hostage, fine, include them too.

    The GOP wants us to honor our agreements, then this should be tenet #1.

  185. 185.

    Geminid

    @cain: An amusing sidenote to the Israeli-U.A.E. diplomatic agreement: not long after, a couple of young men, Palestinian citizens of Israel, dressed up in Arab robes complete with headress, and drove around Haifa in a shiny luxury car, playing loud Emirati pop songs. When they would park, excited Jewish Israelis would come up and greet the “Emirati tourists,” After posing for selfies and group pictures, the young men let the smiling Haifa residents know that they were not in fact Emiratis, but lived in a Palestinian town 25 minutes away.

    This was a funny story and made both the Times of Israel and the Jerusalem Post. But as reporters pointed out, the men would not have gotten such an enthusiastic reception if they had not been pretending to be Emiratis. Still, the event showed the enthusiasm Jewish Israelis have for their new diplomatic partners, at least in relatively liberal and secular Haifa.

  186. 186.

    Jay

    @Brachiator:

    the Isolationist element in the US has always been there.

    France, Germany and the UK could not trust that if the Soviets invaded, that the US wouldn’t just r-u-n-n-o-f-t.

    Based on what they believed and knew about Soviet Nuclear Doctrine, a handful of nukes in their control, meant that the US had to stay and fight.

    While the French and UK nukes “tactically” targeted the Soviet Union, strategically, they targeted the US.

Comments are closed.