When Afghanistan falls, you think its over ?

[Rustyeye77]

NOT A CHANCE IN HELL.


We have serious national security interests. The Taliban will become terror state and a threat to the region causing instability as a terror state. And They will hook up with other terror states. The US will be forced to get involved militarily ....take it to the bank.

People will be murdered and are probably are being murdered at will... including and especially women.

The blood bath Ive read has already begun. Just because we don't see it doesn't mean its not happening.

Girls will be treated like garbage. And Forget education.

And the humanitarian crisis is just beginning. We'll be involved in that WITH THE MILITARY.


The ONLY WAY OUT OF THIS is to get other countries involved.


You don't like the US in there ?..... Ok...but you might like the US *NOT* being in there even LESS.


Flame away but IT WILL NOT BE OVER.

[Lithos]

1. it is time now for China to lose a generation or two there

Price for wanting to be a Superpower

[Rustyeye77]

2. I dont understand your post.

what side would China be on ?

[brooklynite]

7. China is not a fan of Muslims.

OTOH they don’t shares border.

[Devil Child]

14. China borders Afghanistan

Not by much but they have one.

China doesn’t care much for Muslims but Muslim governments and Militant Muslim organizations outside of China don’t seem to care much about Chinese oppression of Muslims.

[Lithos]

16. they actually do share a border

google Wakhan corridor.

[Lithos]

18. Afghanistan is a sinkhold of superpowers

Most of the historical superpowers have gotten into Afghanistan for several generations, only to leave with the country back to what it was.

England, Soviet Union and now the US. China is next .

And when you consider the Silk Road initiative where China is trying to create a trade conduit into Pakistan, it does make more sense for them to have a role in Afghanistan. However, their role will be much more pragmatic and more about sphere of influence than in actual land-holding. Perhaps they will succeed with this outlook.

L-

[Rustyeye77]

19. I agree...but thats why its the WORLDS problem.

[Lithos]

21. Should be

But won't be.

Too many people have their fingers into this pie. Iran vs Saudis, Pakistan vs India, Russia vs US and then China off to the side.

[Devil Child]

11. Chinese strategic goals in Afghanistan have great chance of success

China is strategic partners and allies of Pakistan. China has no desires of instilling Western-style democracy. China has already come to an agreement of non-aggression with the Taliban who will soon rule in Afghanistan. China, Pakistan, and the Taliban are advancing their agendas quite easily. We have simply paved the way for them at our expense.

[JI7]

23. There have been terrorist attacks on Chinese in Pakistan

This isn't so simple .

[meadowlander]

20. Based on their treatment of the Uyghurs i don't think anyone wants to see that.

[Rustyeye77]

26. " Yes let China deal with it"

crazy

[jimfields33]

3. Afghanistan doesn't want us there

They have an army that they need to utilize. Time for them to fight for their country.

[padfun]

4. This sounds like something from Newsmax or OAN

The Taliban will take over the opium trade from the USA and then rule the way they see fit. This kind of thinking was said back when I returned from Viet Nam. And I've heard it when Bush Jr went into Iraq. This is dangerous thinking.

You should be more worried from the Terrorists in this country. They will try another coup in the next election or two. And then I think you will see murders and killing from this group. They are already talking violence against "Libs."

[IrishAfricanAmerican]

8. 👆🏽👆🏽 THIS!! 👆🏽👆🏽

[Rustyeye77]

13. *THIS* is bullshit

You see, if you dont agree with everything in lockstep, you must be a RWer.

[IrishAfricanAmerican]

38. "You should be more worried from the Terrorists in this country."

Is not bullshit.

[Rustyeye77]

10. OK

Viet Nam wasnt a terrorist state.
Afghanistan has already proved it is.

[padfun]

17. And how do you define "Terrorist State?"

Apparently you weren't around back in the mid 70's. The scare put upon the RW public was fierce. Attacks against hippies, leftist and anyone who wasn't "Merkan" was a reality. It still is.

So who is the Terrorist? the group you are for or the group you are against. Just rename the group into 'Freedom fighters' and then you are good to go. We can find another country we can call "Terrorists" and invade them. We did it all through the Reagan years. And we were supposed to attack 7 middle east countries during Bush's years. We called all of those countries "Terrorists."

BTW, we invaded Afghanistan because they wanted some proof before they were going to turn over OBL. Until that moment, they were our allies.

[EX500rider]

27. "Until that moment, they were our allies."

Yeah the US was never allies with the Taliban.
The US didn't even recognize them as the government, only Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) recognized the legitimacy of the Taliban government.

[Rustyeye77]

32. SHUUUUSH..Dont bring up facts.

hes on a roll.

[elevator]

41. Osama Bin Laden was not Afgan. And the Taliban offered to turn him over.

But, we refused to do business with them. Another in the long list of intelligence blunders by the US in foreign policy.

[David__77]

46. No I think OAN and maybe Newsmax will not campaign for intervention.

Trump wanted to pull and I appreciate that Biden is pulling out. The actual Trumpists are not neoconservatives.

[Vogon_Glory]

5. I suspect more grief

I concur with Lithos that the Chinese may take their hand. Nobody likes a terrorist-breeding cesspit on their borders and I suspect that the PRC will send trips into Afghanistan.

I suspect that the Chinese will play a lot rougher than we did. I suspect they’ll try to do to the Afghans what they’re currently doing in China’s Central Asian provinces.

I’m no friend of the Taliban. Let them reap what they’re sowing.

[David__77]

47. Zero chance of Chinese troops in Afghanistan. Zero.

China would defend its border against infiltration by Islamist and separatist groups. I think Taleban may very well not support such groups if it endangers relations with China, which would be willing to diplomatically recognize Taleban should it seize power.

[Thomas Hurt]

6. If the end result is that we provided training and equipment to the Afghanis...

and they fold to the Taliban, have we just given the Taliban a standing army and infrastructure to expand?

I don't think the Taliban has been expansionist in the past but I am by no means up on its history.

[Shanti Shanti Shanti]

29. Vietnaminzation didnt work then, wont work now, it will all fall

[Klaralven]

9. The US is going back to the Brzezinski doctrine and Operation Cyclone

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zbigniew_Brzezinski#Afghanistan

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

Except this time the objective is to use Afghanistan as a breeding ground for Islamic terrorists directed against China and secondarily Central Asia, the Caucasus, and Russia. Note that we have taken the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM) off the "terrorist list" and will shortly put them back on the "freedom fighter" list.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkistan_Islamic_Party#Terrorist_designation

[Johnny2X2X]

12. You deal with the Taliban

Simple as that, and even Trump was trying to cut a deal with them then.

We simply cannot stay there forever and pulling combat troops out doesn't mean we're sacrificing our security. We still have intelligence assets in the region and the ability to address threats as they arise.

[Rustyeye77]

15. No...The world has to deal with the TALIBAN.

[totodeinhere]

22. The Taliban has said that when they retake control of all of Afghanistan they will not harbor

terrorism. So why don't we give them a chance to prove that? In if they do sponsor terrorism then we will have options to deal with that short of another invasion which will not work.

[Rustyeye77]

24. Are you serious?

You want to trust these people?

I cant say ive read that before.

[totodeinhere]

30. I would trust the Taliban before I would trust Donald Trump or Mitch McConnell.

But if the Taliban go back with their promises we can deal with that.

[maxsolomon]

31. Trust isn't the issue. Of course we don't trust them.

They have repeatedly said they won't harbor Terror groups (they offered to turn Bin Laden over in the face of our post-9/11 bombing: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5 ).

The US has little choice but to work from that, and verify verify verify. We do have the technology to monitor Afghanistan much more closely than we did in 2001. Quarantine the godforsaken place.

And it's not like we have fewer missiles and killer drones.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

25. Hop on a plane and join The Resistance.

[Shanti Shanti Shanti]

28. Napalm all the poppy fields on the way out, its the only way to be sure

[0rganism]

35. Perhaps the primary failure was considering Afghanistan to be a single state

with isolated tribal populations spread out over unforgiving terrain, maybe a looser confederation of largely independent sub-states would have been more appropriate.

[maxsolomon]

48. Primary failure was invading Iraq.

Before that, electing GWB who couldn't strategerize his way out of a paper bag.

Before that, enabling the Mujahadeen.

Before that, Russia's invasion.

Before that, the Saur Revolution.

Before that, the Daoud Republic.

Things were actually going fairly well under the King in the 70s. At least it was groovier.

[stillcool]

36. it's their country...

what's not bombed to smithereens. They'd have to get the Saudi's to carry out any terror attacks, and we can arm them again to fight against the Russians. It's not like we haven't been dealing with the Taliban since the Bush Administration started the crap. Unfortunately they won't bend enough to suit business interests. Let those interests hire Erik Prince.

[Rustyeye77]

37. I'm just the messenger.

If you think I'm wrong, ok.

Time will tell.



.

[SoonerPride]

40. Future presdients won't ignore a PDB about a threat of imminent attack.

Bush's incompetence allowed 9/11 to happen.

Full stop.

[SoonerPride]

39. It is no longer our concern.

If they threaten us, we can respond.

You know, Bush was warned in his PDB about Bin Laden.

Had he acted all of this could have been avoided.

ALL OF IT.

[Chainfire]

42. So, if we couldn't fix it in 20 years we should just stay on?

The Afghans are going to have to determine their own future. It is their choice to make, not ours. None of the interference from the Russians or us have made a real difference. We only brought our brand of civilization to places we controlled by the point of a gun. It is amazing how "civilized" people can get when they are occupied by foreigners with planes, bombs and guns. We have found out, like we did in Vietnam, that we can not kill enough people to bring them the government we want them to have; though Lord knows we have tried.

We are in a struggle for our own future. We are watching the Republicans try to pull our Democracy out from under our feet. If they get their wishes, we will also live in a right-wing/religious society that wants to return to a time when (white) men were men and women and people of color knew their places. Once we get our own affairs in order, maybe will will have the credentials to help others again. It is like the old song from West Side Story, Krupke, we have troubles of our own.

I have no doubt that as soon as the military money train dries up in Afghanistan, we will find someone else who needs our "help." There are Americans who's fortunes depend on it.

[Retrograde]

43. That sunk-cost fallacy is a great fallacy!

We've already spent who knows how many billions of dollars propping up an Afghan government over the last 20 years, but now if we just invest a *little bit more* a miracle will somehow happen and everything will be coming up roses. Or poppies.

One reason why the US is so behind in many areas, including infrastructure, health care access, and basic education is because we have this bad habit of squandering money trying to prop up dubious regimes. And time and again it just doesn't work. Maybe we should try leading by example this time and build a culture and economy at home that people in countries like Afghanistan will want to emulate.

[Rustyeye77]

44. Wow

Suppose we had 20 years of a terror state ? How much would that have cost?

Nation building sucks …. But in this world, not nation building may be worse.

Bottom line… the rest of the world can’t sit on their hands.

I hope Biden can make that happen.

[Chainfire]

49. The terrorist came from Saudi!

It is as if we should attack Canada for the migrant influx from Mexico.

[Rustyeye77]

50. Tell me something I dont know.

[David__77]

45. Reminds me of the WMD stuff with Iraq. US does not rule world.

I’m glad the US is getting out.