Biden will withdraw all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by Sept. 11, 2021

[ouch]

Isn't Afghanistan said to be where Empires go to die? When nothing will change in that country, maybe it's best to leave them be. I do hope that their poor struggling population will find ways to move forward after next Sept.

Biden will withdraw all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by Sept. 11, 2021 (msn.com)

Officially, there are 2,500 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, although the number fluctuates and is currently about 1,000 more than that. There are also up to an additional 7,000 foreign forces in the coalition there, the majority of them NATO troops.

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.

 

[Mycroft]

Isn't Afghanistan said to be where Empires go to die? When nothing will change in that country, maybe it's best to leave them be. I do hope that their poor struggling population will find ways to move forward after next Sept.

Biden will withdraw all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by Sept. 11, 2021 (msn.com)
View attachment 67328394
Officially, there are 2,500 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, although the number fluctuates and is currently about 1,000 more than that. There are also up to an additional 7,000 foreign forces in the coalition there, the majority of them NATO troops.

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.

"The decision, which Biden is expected to announce on Wednesday, will keep thousands of U.S. forces in the country beyond the May 1 exit deadline that the Trump administration negotiated last year with the Taliban, according to a senior administration official who briefed reporters Tuesday under rules of anonymity set by the White House."​

You know, I heard this news earlier this morning when I was driving about and listening to a local college radio station. What really caught my interest, though, was the comment by the college student radio guy...he said, "Well, here's hoping we get our troops home sometime in the next four years."

My sentiments, exactly.

Oh...and that part I highlighted? How's that for Biden administration openness and transparency? Biden's handlers can't even be open and honest when THEY are the unnamed source.

 

[MamboDervish]

"The decision, which Biden is expected to announce on Wednesday, will keep thousands of U.S. forces in the country beyond the May 1 exit deadline that the Trump administration negotiated last year with the Taliban, according to a senior administration official who briefed reporters Tuesday under rules of anonymity set by the White House."​

You know, I heard this news earlier this morning when I was driving about and listening to a local college radio station. What really caught my interest, though, was the comment by the college student radio guy...he said, "Well, here's hoping we get our troops home sometime in the next four years."

My sentiments, exactly.

Oh...and that part I highlighted? How's that for Biden administration openness and transparency? Biden's handlers can't even be open and honest when THEY are the unnamed source.

?? You're are attempting to conflate being open and honest about the message, with being open and honest about the messenger.
Two completely different things.

 

[bomberfox]

I do worry about the translators and afgans who helped us. They would be done for if the taliban took over the country. That said i dont think there really ever was a victory condition that would have allowed us to say “ok the job is done”

 

[ecofarm]

The US will not abandon the dozens of women elected to provincial office. The world will continue to provide development aid and pull the nation out of the 19th century.

 

[Antiwar]

... despite two decades of effort by the United States to defeat the militants and establish stable, democratic governance.

Warring for democracy in foreign lands?

 

[Phys251]

Isn't Afghanistan said to be where Empires go to die? When nothing will change in that country, maybe it's best to leave them be. I do hope that their poor struggling population will find ways to move forward after next Sept.

Biden will withdraw all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by Sept. 11, 2021 (msn.com)
View attachment 67328394
Officially, there are 2,500 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, although the number fluctuates and is currently about 1,000 more than that. There are also up to an additional 7,000 foreign forces in the coalition there, the majority of them NATO troops.

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.

Thank you, President Biden!

 

[Antiwar]

Isn't Afghanistan said to be where Empires go to die? When nothing will change in that country, maybe it's best to leave them be.

How about the USG stop acting in imperial ways?

The concept of empire is associated with other such concepts as imperialism, colonialism, and globalization, with imperialism referring to the creation and maintenance of unequal relationships between nations and not necessarily the policy of a state headed by an emperor or empress. Empire is often used as a term to describe displeasure to overpowering situations.[2]

 

[ouch]

You know, I heard this news earlier this morning when I was driving about and listening to a local college radio station. What really caught my interest, though, was the comment by the college student radio guy...he said, "Well, here's hoping we get our troops home sometime in the next four years."

My sentiments, exactly.

The article expressed that all US troops were to be removed by Sept 11. I also expect that if an unfortunate flareup by the Taliban would take place prior to that, all bets would be off again.

The official said the U.S. withdrawal would be fully coordinated with NATO and other coalition partners. Citing NATO’s “in together, out together” mantra, the senior official said “we will take the time we need to execute that, and no more time than that.”

Mycroft said:
Oh...and that part I highlighted? How's that for Biden administration openness and transparency? Biden's handlers can't even be open and honest when THEY are the unnamed source.

I'm not clear about what your complaint is. An Administration doesn't usually lay out a detailed plan for troop movement - in or out, where or when exactly. Biden is to explain more about this tomorrow while Blinken and Austin are in Brussels today and tomorrow making contact with NATO counterparts.


Adam Smith has given his take about Biden's decision.

“There are no good, easy decisions here,” said House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith (D-Wash.). “Given the options, I think this is the best choice.”

“We cannot impose a solution on Afghanistan,” Smith said in an interview. “I don’t doubt for a second there is going to continue to be violence and turbulence,” but the main transnational terrorist threat is now elsewhere. “We can only be in so many places. We have to make choices, and those choices are not easy. It’s not as if we didn’t put in the time in Afghanistan,” he said.

 

[ouch]

Warring for democracy in foreign lands?

you can lay this one at the feet of Bush 43.

 

[Mycroft]

The article expressed that all US troops were to be removed by Sept 11. I also expect that if an unfortunate flareup by the Taliban would take place prior to that, all bets would be off again.





I'm not clear about what your complaint is. An Administration doesn't usually lay out a detailed plan for troop movement - in or out, where or when exactly. Biden is to explain more about this tomorrow while Blinken and Austin are in Brussels today and tomorrow making contact with NATO counterparts.


Adam Smith has given his take about Biden's decision.

The Biden administration's best option would be to just continue what Trump has already done and bring the troops home sooner. No delays necessary.

 

[jpn]

The US will not abandon the dozens of women elected to provincial office. The world will continue to provide development aid and pull the nation out of the 19th century.

I doubt it.

I totally support pulling out. The only way that we'd stop the Taliban from retaking the country is via a permanent presence. And I'm not for that.

However, the Taliban are a friggin' nightmare and the poor Afghans are going to once again suffer the ravages of religious extremism. Women will have no power. Music outlawed. Public executions by stoning. If you've read The Kite Runner you know what this means.

It will be the worst of Medieval times brought to the 21st Century. It's going to be a horror show.

Those poor people.

 

[jpn]

The Biden administration's best option would be to just continue what Trump has already done and bring the troops home sooner. No delays necessary.

Trump didn't have the guts to make this decision. Biden does.

 

[jpn]

The article expressed that all US troops were to be removed by Sept 11. I also expect that if an unfortunate flareup by the Taliban would take place prior to that, all bets would be off again.

Maybe. However, the White House spokesman said this:

“This is not conditions-based. The president has judged that a conditions-based approach . . . is a recipe for staying in Afghanistan forever. He has reached the conclusion that the United States will complete its drawdown and will remove its forces from Afghanistan before September 11th.”​

​

"And so [Biden] has reached the conclusion that United States will complete its drawdown, will remove its forces from Afghanistan before September 11th. And I would hasten to note, for those on the call, that a lot of this is about operational and logistical issues related to ensuring that we have a safe and orderly withdrawal."​

​

"That withdrawal may be completed well in advance of September 11th. But that is the outside date by which it will be completed. And, as I said, it will begin before May 1. It will be completed over the course of that next period and no later than the 20th anniversary of 9/11, but potentially a meaningful amount of time before then."​

Sounds pretty final. NATO is also out by 9/11.

 

[jpn]

Oh...and that part I highlighted? How's that for Biden administration openness and transparency? Biden's handlers can't even be open and honest when THEY are the unnamed source.

God, you're so tiresome.

The exchange with reporters is on the White House website.

 

[Felis Leo]

Isn't Afghanistan said to be where Empires go to die? When nothing will change in that country, maybe it's best to leave them be. I do hope that their poor struggling population will find ways to move forward after next Sept.

Biden will withdraw all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by Sept. 11, 2021 (msn.com)
View attachment 67328394
Officially, there are 2,500 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, although the number fluctuates and is currently about 1,000 more than that. There are also up to an additional 7,000 foreign forces in the coalition there, the majority of them NATO troops.

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.

Good. The only way to win a guerrilla war against the Taliban would require the United States to perform atrocities and a campaign of depopulation, deportation and concentration of the Pashtun population's regions on a level like that used by the British during the Second Boer War, Joseph Stalin against the Soviet Union's ethnic minorities or the Chinese against the Uyghur Muslims.

We cannot stoop to that level. We must depart.

 

[Felis Leo]

I do worry about the translators and afgans who helped us. They would be done for if the taliban took over the country. That said i dont think there really ever was a victory condition that would have allowed us to say “ok the job is done”

I think we could have forced a Taliban surrender, theoretically. Guerrilla wars have proven to be winnable. But the secret is this: You strip the guerrilla fighters of their support by depopulating and concentrating the civilian population. In this case, in Pashtun regions where the Taliban was operating, our forces would herd all Pashtun-speaking people into massive concentration camps, disarm them, and kill any who resisted, and kept them there with the aid of other rival tribal and ethnic groups of the region, such as Tajiks. That is how British won in South Africa; that is how Stalin won against ethnic minorities in the Soviet Union; and that is how the Chinese are winning against Uyghur rebels in West China. Of course, in order to have achieved this, we would have become utter monsters in the process. At best we would have come out looking like the British against the Boers in the Second Boer War. More likely we would look like the Chinese but ten times worse.

 

[Felis Leo]

I do worry about the translators and afgans who helped us. They would be done for if the taliban took over the country. That said i dont think there really ever was a victory condition that would have allowed us to say “ok the job is done”

We should open our doors to them and their families as far as I am concerned. They can and should be offered a fast-track to citizenship.

 

[Mycroft]

Trump didn't have the guts to make this decision. Biden does.

It doesn't take guts to keep our troops in the region when they don't need to be there and they've been there too long. It takes stupidity.

Biden has a lot of stupidity going for him.

 

[Antiwar]

Good. The only way to win a guerrilla war against the Taliban would require the United States to perform atrocities and a campaign of depopulation, deportation and concentration of the Pashtun population's regions on a level like that used by the British during the Second Boer War, Joseph Stalin against the Soviet Union's ethnic minorities or the Chinese against the Uyghur Muslims.

The çlaim of genocide of Uyghurs hasn't been confirmed.

We cannot stoop to that level. We must depart.

The USG stoops to lots of low levels. It seems like you believe that the USG's goal is to help liberate people or something similar. The USG's goal is to kill "terrorists."

 

[Schism]

We were lied into that war. Democracy will never really take root in Afghanistan. and that's okay.

Let them be the people they want to be. It's their nation.

 

[btthegreat]

Of course we will all analyze this as a failed policy with heavy costs and we will play the usual blame game and hoist it on our politicians. They did not send those troops in a political vacumn. We told them in clear terms we wanted ACTION, we were nearly unanimous about this target, this goal, and this strategy. The first polls in October of 2001 showed 87% were in support of this military invasion to punish the Taliban for protecting the Al Queda and Osama Bin Laden. Which Congressmen are going to vote against this and turn around and try to sell themselves as tough on terror in two years? Maybe Iraq was sold on lies, but not this one. We not only wanted this, we virtually demanded it just as we did after the Thorton skirmish in 1846, gulf of Tonka / USS Maddox attack, the sinking of the Lusitania etc.

Public opinion was measured on this one, none of us much cared about an exit strategy, or how we were going to re-invest in rebuilding what we bombed, and our reprentatives in Washington responded to our bloodlust predictably.

 

[Tigerace117]

The çlaim of genocide of Uyghurs hasn't been confirmed.


The USG stoops to lots of low levels. It seems like you believe that the USG's goal is to help liberate people or something similar. The USG's goal is to kill "terrorists."

Yes.....it pretty much has.

But I’m not surprised you would desperately try to deny it.

 

[j brown's body]

I'm not convinced that this is a good idea. The troops we have there now cost us very little, but they are keeping women and urban folks safer from the religious extremists. We threw them out of power, it should be on us to makesure they can't return.

 

[jpn]

There has never been a good solution to the problem of Afghanistan. For whatever reason—and we will be studying it for years—we cannot defeat the Taliban using only the resources the American public will tolerate. It's even possible we can't defeat the Taliban, period. A stalemate is the best we can do, and a stalemate will last forever since, after 20 years, it's obvious that the establishment Afghan regime will never be able to produce either a consensus government or a standalone military capable of standing up to the Taliban.

This has been clear for a long time. Obama knew it. Trump knew it. But neither had the courage of their convictions. If the US pulls out completely, the Taliban will overrun Afghanistan in a year or so. In other words, the United States will have definitively lost a war it spent 20 years fighting. No president is willing to be the guy who approved that.

But now Biden says he's going to do it. If he follows through on this, it will be a mark of singular courage.