It’s time for the United States to let Afghanistan go

[pakistani342]

Article here, excerpts below:

Recently a group of former U.S. officials and experts issued a proposalfor an "enduring partnership" with Afghanistan, calling the nation "a key front in a generational conflict against violent extremists across the greater Middle East." The group, which included Generals Stanley McChrystal and David Petraeus, both former commanders of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, argued that in addition to preventing Afghanistan from again becoming a sanctuary for terrorist organizations, a long-term American presence is critical to ensure stability in the region and as a base of operations to conduct operations against other adversaries in the war on terror.

It is understandable that officials whose professional careers are so closely connected with the current U.S. strategy would find it difficult to admit failure, but the truth is there is no good reason to stay in Afghanistan.

 

[A-Team]

Article here, excerpts below:

Recently a group of former U.S. officials and experts issued a proposalfor an "enduring partnership" with Afghanistan, calling the nation "a key front in a generational conflict against violent extremists across the greater Middle East." The group, which included Generals Stanley McChrystal and David Petraeus, both former commanders of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, argued that in addition to preventing Afghanistan from again becoming a sanctuary for terrorist organizations, a long-term American presence is critical to ensure stability in the region and as a base of operations to conduct operations against other adversaries in the war on terror.

It is understandable that officials whose professional careers are so closely connected with the current U.S. strategy would find it difficult to admit failure, but the truth is there is no good reason to stay in Afghanistan.

The understanding of the importance of Afghanistan is deeply enshrined in those that are serving and have served in Afghanistan. Most of them are now in leadership positions in the US military and the next generation will follow.
I foresee an enduring commitment to Afghanistan and there is bipartisan support for Afghanistan.Hillary Clinton also understand the dynmaics of Afghanistan.

PS . Billions have been committed until the end of this decade.Afghan reliance is slowly going away,.

Article here, excerpts below:

Recently a group of former U.S. officials and experts issued a proposalfor an "enduring partnership" with Afghanistan, calling the nation "a key front in a generational conflict against violent extremists across the greater Middle East." The group, which included Generals Stanley McChrystal and David Petraeus, both former commanders of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, argued that in addition to preventing Afghanistan from again becoming a sanctuary for terrorist organizations, a long-term American presence is critical to ensure stability in the region and as a base of operations to conduct operations against other adversaries in the war on terror.

It is understandable that officials whose professional careers are so closely connected with the current U.S. strategy would find it difficult to admit failure, but the truth is there is no good reason to stay in Afghanistan.

Ashraf Ghani has lived in the US and understand the American psyche, Karzai nearly fucked it up

 

[!eon]

Article here, excerpts below:

Recently a group of former U.S. officials and experts issued a proposalfor an "enduring partnership" with Afghanistan, calling the nation "a key front in a generational conflict against violent extremists across the greater Middle East." The group, which included Generals Stanley McChrystal and David Petraeus, both former commanders of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, argued that in addition to preventing Afghanistan from again becoming a sanctuary for terrorist organizations, a long-term American presence is critical to ensure stability in the region and as a base of operations to conduct operations against other adversaries in the war on terror.

It is understandable that officials whose professional careers are so closely connected with the current U.S. strategy would find it difficult to admit failure, but the truth is there is no good reason to stay in Afghanistan.

A bit further he says

In Afghanistan terrorism was almost unknown before 2001, but between 2002 and 2015 over 9,000 terrorist attacks took place in Afghanistan alone, the majority of them after President Obama's surge began in 2009. It is hard to imagine a strategy that would have done a better job at fomenting terrorism than the U.S. effort in Afghanistan.

 

[pakistani342]

The understanding of the importance of Afghanistan is deeply enshrined in those that are serving and have served in Afghanistan. Most of them are now in leadership positions in the US military and the next generation will follow.
I foresee an enduring commitment to Afghanistan and there is bipartisan support for Afghanistan.Hillary Clinton also understand the dynmaics of Afghanistan.

PS . Billions have been committed until the end of this decade.Afghan reliance is slowly going away,.



Ashraf Ghani has lived in the US and understand the American psyche, Karzai nearly fucked it up

I wonder how you then explain what happened to Vietnam? Clearly more Americans had served in Vietnam which was a far more strategic country (as is Syria, Libya, Iraq than Afghanistan), a far more (and is) developed country, with a far more educated population, with a much deeper American involvement. The US had almost 60,000 deaths in Vietnam compared with almost 2400 in Afghanistan.

The laws of Physics tend to be the same for everybody but can be unforgiving

 

[A-Team]

A bit further he says

Currently Obama is in the lame duck period of his presidency and thus it will be for the next president to change course.
Afghanistan will continue to build institutions, because unless the institution are strong, today it maybe Pakistan, the next day it will be Iran or China that will interfere in Afghanistan unless Afghans create strong insituation.
Right now as things are and continue to be like that for the next 5 years, I see the Afghan state winning this albeit with significant pain.

I wonder how you then explain what happened to Vietnam? Clearly more Americans had served in Vietnam which was a far more strategic country (as is Syria, Libya, Iraq than Afghanistan), a far more (and is) developed country, with a far more educated population, with a much deeper American involvement. The US had almost 60,000 deaths in Vietnam compared with almost 2400 in Afghanistan.

The laws of Physics tend to be the same for everybody but can be unforgiving

Good question and they have been rooting that for decades on why the left and besides there was significant opposition to that war by american public in general, have you seen any mass protest regarding the Afghan conflict? How many senators protest or speak up against the Afghan conflict? But on the contrary Ashraf Ghani got an impressive standing ovation while visiting the US?

How many super powers are assisting the Talis as opposed to viet congs?

 

[pakistani342]

Currently Obama is in the lame duck period of his presidency and thus it will be for the next president to change course.
Afghanistan will continue to build institutions, because unless the institution are strong, today it maybe Pakistan, the next day it will be Iran or China that will interfere in Afghanistan unless Afghans create strong insituation.
Right now as things are and continue to be like that for the next 5 years, I see the Afghan state winning this albeit with significant pain.

Interesting how an un-educated, improvised, conflict wracked, landlocked Afghanistan will do that even when relatively peaceful countries like Pakistan find that challenging.

As the other Article I posted -- the US Military gives the ANSF a D- which is the arguably the best Afghan institution.

 

[!eon]

Currently Obama is in the lame duck period of his presidency and thus it will be for the next president to change course.
Afghanistan will continue to build institutions, because unless the institution are strong, today it maybe Pakistan, the next day it will be Iran or China that will interfere in Afghanistan unless Afghans create strong insituation.
Right now as things are and continue to be like that for the next 5 years, I see the Afghan state winning this albeit with significant pain.

For the next president, either Hillary or Trump, I can only say God bless poor Americans and you are talking about Afghans ?
You will realize it. American elections are not far away.

 

[A-Team]

Interesting how an un-educated, improvised, conflict wracked, landlocked Afghanistan will do that even when relatively peaceful countries like Pakistan find that challenging.

As the other Article I posted -- the US Military gives the ANSF a D- which is the arguably the best Afghan institution.

D- is passing which is good enough for us right now, we have the time while the opposition has the watchs.
After Hekmatyar, now the Tali splinter group is now making peace with the Afghan state because they know they can't bet the Afghan state.

For the next president, either Hillary or Trump, I can only say God bless poor Americans and you are talking about Afghans ?
You will realize it. American elections are not far away.

? Not sure where you are going with this? If Trump wins, then Pakistan is screwed you only have to watch his thoughts on Pakistan, if Hillary wins then she is on the record and how Pakistan continued to shelter OBL.

 

[pakistani342]

Good question and they have rooting that for decades on why the left

Clearly you do not know American history -- the question today is why the hell did we go into Vietnam -- it has no consequence for us -- engaging in Vietnam is considered a blunder -- there is no significant countervailing opinion to that in the US.

and besides there was significant opposition to that war by american public in general, have you seen any mass protest regarding the Afghan conflict?

The opposition to the Afghan was is roughly 50% -- given that there are almost no casualties in the US. Further there are competing spending priorities: today the American middle class is under threat, that simply did not exist during the Vietnam war.

How many senators can against the Afghan conflict? But on the contrary Ashraf Ghani got an impressive standing ovation while visiting the US?

The house is ambivalent on the Afghan war: Ghani got a standing ovation because he is a brown man dressed in funny baggy pants who can speak good english -- the same way Benazir the leader of a sanctioned Ally got a standing ovation (and was introduced as the Prime Minister of India).

D- is passing which is good enough for us right now, we have the time while the opposition has the watchs.
After Hekmatyar, now the Tali splinter group is now making peace with the Afghan state because they know they can't bet the Afghan state.

Clearly you have high expectations -- the day my daughter brings home a D-, she dies a slow painful death (is how I've explained it to her)

 

[A-Team]

Clearly you do not know American history -- the question today is why the hell did we go into Vietnam -- it has no consequence for us -- engaging in Vietnam is considered a blunder -- there is no significant countervailing opinion to that in the US.



The opposition to the Afghan was is roughly 50% -- given that there are almost no casualties in the US. Further there are competing spending priorities: today the American middle class is under threat, that simply did not exist during the Vietnam war.



The house is ambivalent on the Afghan war: Ghani got a standing ovation because he is a brown man dressed in funny baggy pants who can speak good english -- the same way Benazir the leader of a sanctioned Ally got a standing ovation (and was introduced as the Prime Minister of India).



Clearly you have high expectations -- the day my daughter brings home a D-, she dies a slow painful death (is how I've explained it to her)

don't be harsh on her dude, you do know that some school dropouts are some of the richest and successful people in the world

 

[!eon]

? Not sure where you are going with this? If Trump wins, then Pakistan is screwed you only have to watch his thoughts on Pakistan, if Hillary wins then she is on the record and how Pakistan continued to shelter OBL.

If you look closely, you will find Pakistan is already in China-Russia group.
Gone are days when sole lion used to roar in Jungle. Check in Syria and South China sea, if you still insist.

 

[pakistani342]

don't be harsh on her dude, you do know that some school dropouts are some of the richest and successful people in the world

In our household we value scholarship far more than money -- and my little princess understands that very clearly -- she is after all daddy's little girl.

? Not sure where you are going with this? If Trump wins, then Pakistan is screwed you only have to watch his thoughts on Pakistan, if Hillary wins then she is on the record and how Pakistan continued to shelter OBL.

If Trump wins Trump is screwed.

If Hillary wins: you do know her right hand woman is Huma Abedin (Pakistani)

The Pakistani Diaspora is asleep in the US but they are influential -- plus Pakistan would be an American Muslim issue -- Afghanistan would not be.

 

[A-Team]

In our household we value scholarship far more than money -- and my little princess understands that very clearly -- she is after all daddy's little girl.



If Trump wins Trump is screwed.

If Hillary wins: you do know her right hand woman is Huma Abedin (Pakistani)

Glad she is hope she will bring some senses into the Pak leadership on how out of touch they are with reality.

I agree on scholarship.

If you look closely, you will find Pakistan is already in China-Russia group.
Gone are days when sole lion used to roar in Jungle. Check in Syria if you still insist.

China yes, Russian not sure. Will any of these sell you out if bigger interests are at stake, in a blink of an eye

 

[pakistani342]

Glad she is hope she will bring some senses into the Pak leadership on how out of touch they are with reality.

I agree on scholarship.

The Pakistani leadership -- it will take another 30-50 years -- culture change is a 2 generation process. Jinnah predicted it would take 100 years to get Pakistan kinda viable: looks like he might turn out to be right.

If you look closely, you will find Pakistan is already in China-Russia group.
Gone are days when sole lion used to roar in Jungle. Check in Syria and South China sea, if you still insist.

@A-Team

I disagree -- there is no Russia-China group.

All the bluster aside -- it is with the US that Pakistan has organic links:
a. Language
b. Diaspora
c. Historical ties

Pakistan and the US are like two co-workers who have hot steamy sex but don't necessarily like each other.

 

[Thəorətic Muslim]

The understanding of the importance of Afghanistan is deeply enshrined in those that are serving and have served in Afghanistan. Most of them are now in leadership positions in the US military and the next generation will follow.
I foresee an enduring commitment to Afghanistan and there is bipartisan support for Afghanistan.Hillary Clinton also understand the dynmaics of Afghanistan.

American involvement in Afghanistan will decrease overtime, but not end.

The wounds of 9/11 are still fresh, and will not waver, it's in everyone's interest to see Afghanistan as "stable" nation the problem comes on how to accomplish that goal. Whether or not the Taliban is transformed into a political party will be key. Old blood feuds will have to end.

America will decrease their footprint in Afghanistan, as already apparent but will, and has the capability to carry out surgical strikes to end terrorist safe zones.