Editorial: Trump's pullout from Afghanistan is rushed and self-serving

[dave8383]

LOL - what ISIS? You mean the ISIS that Trump totally destroyed 30 days after he took office?

No, I mean the ISIS that is still alive and well in Afghanistan and is drooling over the possibility of us leaving so they'll have all the benefits the Taliban gave al Qaeda.

And BTW:

Top US general in the Mideast says ISIS in Iraq and Syria still long-term threat
Robert Burns, The Associated Press
18 hours ago

Marine Corps Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie, commander of U.S. Central Command, talks to journalists during a news briefing at the Pentagon March 13, 2020, in Arlington, Va. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — Although the Islamic State extremist group is battered and scattered, it cannot be fully defeated until the world finds a way to reconcile and resettle the thousands of people displaced by years of war in Iraq and Syria, the general overseeing American military operations in the Mideast said Thursday.

Marine Gen. Frank McKenzie, commander of U.S. Central Command, said there is no military means of solving the problem of Mideast refugees and internally displaced persons, or IDPs, who await repatriation or resettlement and represent what he called an unfortunate byproduct of armed conflicts.
“Today, across vast swaths of Syria and Iraq, the systemic indoctrination of IDP and refugee camp populations who are hostage to the receipt of ISIS ideology is an alarming development with potentially generational implications,” McKenzie said in remarks to the National Council on U.S.-Arab Relations.

He said a solution must come from a joint effort by diplomatic, security and humanitarian organizations.

“Unless the international community finds a way to repatriate, reintegrate into home communities, and support locally grown reconciliation programming of these people, ... we are buying ourselves a strategic problem 10 years down the road when these children grow up radicalized. If we don’t address this now, we’re never really going to defeat ISIS,” he added.

Iranian attacks are down, but not over, CENTCOM commander says
Iranian attacks on U.S. forces have gone down, but there's no reason to believe they're going away.
Meghann Myers

Over the past six years, starting with former President Barack Obama’s decision in 2014 to return U.S. troops to Iraq to halt an advance of Islamic State forces into Iraq from Syria, the U.S. has led an effort to militarily defeat the extremist group in both countries. But the group has not been extinguished, and McKenzie said it has not abandoned its aspiration to recreate a caliphate and attack the West.

President Donald Trump has pushed for a full U.S. withdrawal from Syria, saying the conflict there was not worth U.S. sacrifices, although there currently are at least several hundred U.S. troops there working with local forces to solidify gains against ISIS. The U.S. also has about 3,000 troops still in Iraq; on Tuesday the Pentagon announced that Trump had ordered a drawdown to 2,500 in Iraq with no change for Syria.

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...sis-in-iraq-and-syria-still-long-term-threat/

 

[dave8383]

The Islamic State in Afghanistan Is Down but Not Out.

The Islamic State in Afghanistan Is Down but Not Out.

by Abdul Sayed and Colin P. Clarke
September 14, 2020
Nineteen years after the al Qaida attacks of September 11, 2001, American troops are still deployed in Afghanistan, although there is a new enemy that has emerged to destabilize the country—the Islamic State Khorasan Province, or ISKP. The Afghan Taliban—the same group that provided sanctuary to al Qaida as it planned the 9/11 attacks—is on the verge of entering into a power-sharing agreement with the Afghan government in a peace deal facilitated by the United States.
President Donald Trump seems determined to draw down the U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan to 4,000 soldiers before the presidential election in November. This would be the lowest number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan at any point since just after 9/11. The United States seems to be holding out hope that a potential peace deal will stabilize Afghanistan. Giving the Taliban partial responsibility in governing the country, so the logic goes, could make the group a vested stakeholder in ensuring a de-escalation of violence.

But ISKP remains a growing concern, even as U.S. CENTCOM Commander Gen. Frank McKenzie is optimistic that the Taliban will actually help the United States fight against ISKP militants, as he said back in mid-March. But even as the Taliban and ISKP might remain adversaries, for the United States to rely on the Taliban—a group it has fought against for the past two decades—as a cornerstone of its counterterrorism strategy, seems a risky proposition.
ISKP in Afghanistan is strongest in the strategically important provinces of Nangarhar and Kunar. However, it still retains the capability to conduct spectacular attacks with near impunity in the Afghan capital, as demonstrated by the deadly attack on a Kabul maternity ward in May. To be sure, ISKP has experienced its share of struggles, including the recent killing of its top judge, Abdullah Orakzai.
Even as the Taliban and ISKP might remain adversaries, for the United States to rely on the Taliban as a cornerstone of its counterterrorism strategy seems a risky proposition.
Share on Twitter

Yet despite having its leadership targeted and losing territory, ISKP has proven remarkably resilient. Even without large swaths of territory under its control, ISKP retains a robust cadre of committed fighters dispersed throughout Afghanistan. As demonstrated by the Kabul maternity ward attack and an attack that same day on the funeral of a local police commander in Nangarhar, cells of ISKP fighters have the operational space and resources necessary to launch devastating terrorist attacks. Last month, ISKP militants attacked a prison in Jalalabad in an effort to free imprisoned fighters, in one of the group's deadliest attacks to date, in addition to being sophisticated from a tactical and planning perspective.

https://www.rand.org/blog/2020/09/the-islamic-state-in-afghanistan-is-down-but-not-out.html

 

[MamboDervish]

No, I mean the ISIS that is still alive and well in Afghanistan and is drooling over the possibility of us leaving so they'll have all the benefits the Taliban gave al Qaeda.

And BTW:



https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...sis-in-iraq-and-syria-still-long-term-threat/

So - what do you care about ISIS? Seriously.

 

[dave8383]

So - what do you care about ISIS? Seriously.

Let's see if I can help you?

Read this again: "No, I mean the ISIS that is still alive and well in Afghanistan and is drooling over the possibility of us leaving so they'll have all the benefits the Taliban gave al Qaeda." Remember al Qaeda? They were able to plan, train, etc., in Afghanistan before, and for, 9/11.

 

[MamboDervish]

Let's see if I can help you?

Read this again: "No, I mean the ISIS that is still alive and well in Afghanistan and is drooling over the possibility of us leaving so they'll have all the benefits the Taliban gave al Qaeda." Remember al Qaeda? They were able to plan, train, etc., in Afghanistan before, and for, 9/11.

??
Well . . . no.
The attacks of 9/11/2001 were actually planned in Germany. Shouldn't we have invaded and occupied them forever? Oh . . . . wait. We already did that.
The events of 9/11/2001 were funded by Saudi Arabia. Shouldn't we have invaded and occupied them forever, too?? Too late I guess.
The pilots that flew the planes into the World Trade Center were trained right here in the USA. Shouldn't we invade and occupy ourselves???
Perhaps we already have.

Seriously - were you planning on having the US military invade and occupy every country in the world that might be hatching a plot within their borders to attack the United States? Yes or no? And whose blood and treasure were you planning on using to pay for that global military initiative?

Or perhaps you're not afraid they might attack us. Maybe you're afraid they might rise again to attack our god-given oil fields in Iraq. Was that it?

 

[dave8383]

??
Well . . . no.
The attacks of 9/11/2001 were actually planned in Germany. Shouldn't we have invaded and occupied them forever? Oh . . . . wait. We already did that.
The events of 9/11/2001 were funded by Saudi Arabia. Shouldn't we have invaded and occupied them forever, too?? Too late I guess.
The pilots that flew the planes into the World Trade Center were trained right here in the USA. Shouldn't we invade and occupy ourselves???
Perhaps we already have.

Seriously - were you planning on having the US military invade and occupy every country in the world that might be hatching a plot within their borders to attack the United States? Yes or no? And whose blood and treasure were you planning on using to pay for that global military initiative?

Or perhaps you're not afraid they might attack us. Maybe you're afraid they might rise again to attack our god-given oil fields in Iraq. Was that it?

Well...no....it was the land the Taliban let al Qaeda use to train and plan operations that gave bin Laden the leg up he needed.

You really need to get an education. Your ignorance is showing.

Your first class:




I'll follow this up with more classes as you advance.

 

[MamboDervish]

Well...no....it was the land the Taliban let al Qaeda use to train and plan operations that gave bin Laden the leg up he needed.

You really need to stop following Trump around and get a real education. Your ignorance is showing.

Your first class:

You failed to address my questions. Be that as it may.
Well .... no.
The attack wasn't planned in Afghanistan. The funding didn't come from Afghanistan. The pilots weren't trained in Afghanistan. You're a big boy now - at least we assume that. You can look it up yourself. And while you're at it, as of 2006, al Qaeda had commanders in 40 different countries. Get it?
FORTY DIFFERENT COUNTRIES !!!

As for ISIS, they're already in 18 different countries.
EIGHTEEN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES !!!
Off hand it seems the idea of keeping ISIS out of Afghanistan is also a less than meaningless task. That should be clear to anyone who isn't beholden to the military industrial complex, or a puppet thereof.

So - let me ask you again. Were you planning on having the US military invade and occupy every country in the world that might be hatching a plot within their borders to attack the United States? Yes or no? And whose blood and treasure were you planning on using to pay for that global military initiative? And try not to dodge the question this time.

As for following Trump, I've opposed everything that little weasel has done for the past 40 years. (I'm a New Yorker) But if Trump can pull us out of Bush-the-Lesser's ill-fated and grossly mismanaged endless occupations and "nation building", it'll be the first pat on the back he's ever earned from me.

 

[dave8383]

You failed to address my questions. Be that as it may.
Well .... no.
The attack wasn't planned in Afghanistan. The funding didn't come from Afghanistan. The pilots weren't trained in Afghanistan. You're a big boy now - at least we assume that. You can look it up yourself. And while you're at it, as of 2006, al Qaeda had commanders in 40 different countries. Get it?
FORTY DIFFERENT COUNTRIES !!!

As for ISIS, they're already in 18 different countries.
EIGHTEEN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES !!!
Off hand it seems the idea of keeping ISIS out of Afghanistan is also a less than meaningless task. That should be clear to anyone who isn't beholden to the military industrial complex, or a puppet thereof.

So - let me ask you again. Were you planning on having the US military invade and occupy every country in the world that might be hatching a plot within their borders to attack the United States? Yes or no? And whose blood and treasure were you planning on using to pay for that global military initiative? And try not to dodge the question this time.

As for following Trump, I've opposed everything that little weasel has done for the past 40 years. (I'm a New Yorker) But if Trump can pull us out of Bush-the-Lesser's ill-fated and grossly mismanaged endless occupations and "nation building", it'll be the first pat on the back he's ever earned from me.

D-

You need to try harder in class or we'll give your space to a more realized student.

 

[MamboDervish]

LOL - still dodging the question I see. Don't take this the wrong way, but how old are you?

 

[dave8383]

You've been let go. You can reapply next semester, but I wouldn't count on getting in unless you improve on your knowledge of the subject.

Enjoy your Thanksgiving and don't forget to follow the recommended mitigations.

 

[MamboDervish]

You've been let go. You can reapply next semester, but I wouldn't count on getting in unless you improve on your knowledge of the subject.

Enjoy your Thanksgiving and don't forget to follow the recommended mitigations.

So far we've established that you're vacuous enough to think I'm a Trump supporter, you can't answer a simple yes or no question about whether we should be occupying and nation building every country in the world, and you don't even know how old you are. I think you've hit the trifecta. Congratulations!

I'm happy to leave you with this. See if you can track down a copy of an article written by Robert Pape way back in 2005 - you know, back when you were 8 years old. It's entitled Blowing Up an Assumption. I think the International Herald Tribune might have kept an on-line copy. It might offer some insights about our ongoing occupations in Central Asia and the Middle-East. Good luck.

Now you've been let go.

 

[dave8383]

So far we've established that you're vacuous enough to think I'm a Trump supporter, you can't answer a simple yes or no question about whether we should be occupying and nation building every country in the world, and you don't even know how old you are. I think you've hit the trifecta. Congratulations!

I'm happy to leave you with this. See if you can track down a copy of an article written by Robert Pape way back in 2005 - you know, back when you were 8 years old. It's entitled Blowing Up an Assumption. I think the International Herald Tribune might have kept an on-line copy. It might offer some insights about our ongoing occupations in Central Asia and the Middle-East. Good luck.

Now you've been let go.

Nation building. Is that what you think this is about? You may not think you're a Trump supporter but you're right in line with him. He thinks being in Afghanistan is representative of trying to bring "every country in the world" in line too. You really need to learn about how terrorists take advantage of countries that are in chaos. You're only about 25 years behind the times.

Wake up:

Former Trump national security adviser says withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan and Germany is a mistake
(CNN) — President Donald Trump's former national security adviser H.R. McMaster on Sunday said the withdrawal of US troops from places like Afghanistan and Germany are "mistakes" from a long-term national security perspective and called for a sustained commitment to assisting the Afghan government and its security forces.
In an interview that aired Sunday on CBS' "60 Minutes," McMaster discussed a need to avoid abandoning allies through the hasty withdrawal of US troops. McMaster, a retired Army lieutenant general who served in combat roles in Iraq and Afghanistan, said that Trump has made too many concessions in his peace talks that began this month with the Afghan government and the Taliban.

"He, in effect, is partnering with the Taliban against, in many ways, the Afghan government," he said. "I think that it's an unwise policy. And I think what we require in Afghanistan is a sustained commitment to help the Afghan government and help the Afghan security forces continue to bear the brunt of this fight."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/20/politics/h-r-mcmaster-afghanistan-germany-us-troops/index.html

 

[beerftw]

Why are we still in afghanistan, it is an unwinnable war and has been known as the graveyard of empires. The country have been occupied by american forces for almost 2 decades, before that it was occupied by the soviet union who left because they were defeated monetarily not militarily, and had the soviet union not collapsed they would probably be there today still with no progress.

Prior to that britain and russia fought back and forth to control afghanistan, there were also many empires who tried going back to alexander the great, no one has held onto that area for long and controlling the area requires indefinate and costly occupation, meaning if the us were to remain there until it deemed it safe, america would be occupying it until america itself ceased to be.

I served there from 2010-2011 and really it is a country that is not worth controlling, you need to cut your losses sometimes and realize some countries are violent hellholes and will always be as such without an authoritarian military control of the country.

 

[j brown's body]

Oh, please. If Biden were to propose the same thing two months from now, I'm sure you'd be all for it.

Biden would have reasons that go beyond it being self-serving. That's an important distinction.

Truly, whether you believe troops should be there or not, there is a right way and wrong way to withdraw them. Trump will not care. He will do it more to create future problems than to solve them because he feels it makes him look good.

That is the real issue here.

 

[MamboDervish]

Nation building. Is that what you think this is about? You may not think you're a Trump supporter but you're right in line with him. He thinks being in Afghanistan is representative of trying to bring "every country in the world" in line too. You really need to learn about how terrorists take advantage of countries that are in chaos. You're only about 25 years behind the times.

Wake up:



https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/20/politics/h-r-mcmaster-afghanistan-germany-us-troops/index.html

Oh . . . you again?! I thought I had been "let go"?? (LOL)
Feel free to revisit our discussion after you've answered the simple questions I've asked. Or explain why you're incapable of addressing them.

Don't bother changing the subject by conflating Germany into the issue. I never even suggested we should take our troops out of Germany. I only commented that the events of 9/11/01 originated there - NOT in Afghanistan. Look it up. And after 19 YEARS, FIVE TRILLION DOLLAR$, countless American lives lost, and 10X that ruined, you'd think we should have already succeeded in nation building. Besides creating the most corrupt country on the planet, what did you think our pallets full of dollar$ were doing over there? Why are we building infrastructure? Why the hospitals? Why the sewage treatment plants?? Why the schools - especially for women, - which the Taliban can't abide ??? Hmmm? WHY??? What has any of that to do with achieving military victory over the boogeyman enemy you think resides there? Answer: NOTHING!! It's ONLY purpose is nation building !!

DO YOU OR DON'T YOU WANT TO INVADE AND OCCUPY EVERY OTHER COUNTRY WHERE ISIS AND AL QAEDA RESIDE ??? YES OR NO ??
If not - then WHY NOT? Hey - it's only 40 more countries!! A small price to pay for "stopping terrorism" - - - - right?

(Pssst. Here's a hint to help you answer the questions: You won't find the answer in another article. Difficult as it may seem, you'll have to think for yourself.)
If you can answer the question - yay or nay - then this discussion has someplace it can go.
If you can't answer the damned question, then at least ask yourself why you can't. That might be the beginning of wisdom.

Wake up!

 

[Antiwar]

And BTW:

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...sis-in-iraq-and-syria-still-long-term-threat/

Breaking news: US militarists say US militarism is needed.

 

[Antiwar]

... you need to cut your losses sometimes and realize some countries are violent hellholes and will always be as such without an authoritarian military control of the country.

Authoritarianism doesn't work?! US militarism is authoritarian?

 

[dave8383]

Oh . . . you again?! I thought I had been "let go"?? (LOL)
Feel free to revisit our discussion after you've answered the simple questions I've asked. Or explain why you're incapable of addressing them.

Don't bother changing the subject by conflating Germany into the issue. I never even suggested we should take our troops out of Germany. I only commented that the events of 9/11/01 originated there - NOT in Afghanistan. Look it up. And after 19 YEARS, FIVE TRILLION DOLLAR$, countless American lives lost, and 10X that ruined, you'd think we should have already succeeded in nation building. Besides creating the most corrupt country on the planet, what did you think our pallets full of dollar$ were doing over there? Why are we building infrastructure? Why the hospitals? Why the sewage treatment plants?? Why the schools - especially for women, - which the Taliban can't abide ??? Hmmm? WHY??? What has any of that to do with achieving military victory over the boogeyman enemy you think resides there? Answer: NOTHING!! It's ONLY purpose is nation building !!

DO YOU OR DON'T YOU WANT TO INVADE AND OCCUPY EVERY OTHER COUNTRY WHERE ISIS AND AL QAEDA RESIDE ??? YES OR NO ??
If not - then WHY NOT? Hey - it's only 40 more countries!! A small price to pay for "stopping terrorism" - - - - right?

(Pssst. Here's a hint to help you answer the questions: You won't find the answer in another article. Difficult as it may seem, you'll have to think for yourself.)
If you can answer the question - yay or nay - then this discussion has someplace it can go.
If you can't answer the damned question, then at least ask yourself why you can't. That might be the beginning of wisdom.

Wake up!

Ah, it's all about stabilizing the country so it can't be used by terrorists, non-state actors, to train recruits from the target rich recruiting area AKA Afghanistan and Pakistan. Only you, Trump, and the wacko right-wing would actually think it's about nation-building.

BTW, I'm satisfied that you have no idea what you're talking about. Thank you. The only question left is why did I bother?

 

[MamboDervish]

Ah, it's all about stabilizing the country so it can't be used by terrorists, non-state actors, to train recruits from the target rich recruiting area AKA Afghanistan and Pakistan. Only you, Trump, and the wacko right-wing would actually think it's about nation-building.

BTW, I'm satisfied that you have no idea what you're talking about. Thank you. The only question left is why did I bother?

At this point, only a complete coward would continue to dodge the simple question.

DO YOU OR DON'T YOU WANT TO INVADE AND OCCUPY EVERY OTHER COUNTRY WHERE ISIS AND AL QAEDA RESIDE ??? YES OR NO ??
If not - then WHY NOT? Hey - it's only 40 more countries!! A small price to pay for "stopping terrorism" - - - - right?

Feel free to respond with an answer - or not at all.

 

[Grand Mal]

Oh, please. If Biden were to propose the same thing two months from now, I'm sure you'd be all for it.

And you'd be all against it.
See how that works?

 

[Tigerace117]

So - what do you care about ISIS? Seriously.

So in other words “the numerous people who would be placed in danger if we abandoned our allies don’t matter“.

Isolationism is idiocy.

 

[Tigerace117]

Breaking news: US militarists say US militarism is needed.

Breaking news: isolationists could care less about the people in Iraq and Syria, after all they are foreigners and therefore can be safely left to the “mercies” of vicious terrorist groups.

 

[MamboDervish]

So in other words “the numerous people who would be placed in danger if we abandoned our allies don’t matter“.

Isolationism is idiocy.

Are you publicly admitting that you don't know what naked imperialism is? How courageous of you. Most people wouldn't cop to that level of naivety. Kudos.

Arguably the single most corrupt country in the world - Afghanistan - is NOT our ally! Not in any rational sense of the word! After nineteen years, trillions of US dollar$, and countless American lives wasted and destroyed, Afghanistan is STILL nothing more than a loose and unholy assemblage of warlords, drug lords, local tribal factions, the fundamentalist Taliban, and the grotesquely corrupt puppet government we continue to throw American lives and money after.

When were you imagining that country would coalesce into an ally? Hmm? In your great grandchildren's lifetime?? It's already been an entire generation!!
And at what total cost did you imagine that magical day would come?

Talk about idiocy.

 

[MamboDervish]

Breaking news: isolationists could care less about the people in Iraq and Syria, after all they are foreigners and therefore can be safely left to the “mercies” of vicious terrorist groups.

Tell the truth. Do you work for the military industrial complex? Because they couldn't find a better patsy if you don't.

 

[Tigerace117]

Are you publicly admitting that you don't know what naked imperialism is? How courageous of you. Most people wouldn't cop to that level of naivety. Kudos.

Arguably the single most corrupt country in the world - Afghanistan - is NOT our ally! Not in any rational sense of the word! After nineteen years, trillions of US dollar$, and countless American lives wasted and destroyed, Afghanistan is STILL nothing more than a loose and unholy assemblage of warlords, drug lords, local tribal factions, the fundamentalist Taliban, and the grotesquely corrupt puppet government we continue to throw American lives and money after.

When were you imagining that country would coalesce into an ally? Hmm? In your great grandchildren's lifetime?? It's already been an entire generation!!
And at what total cost did you imagine that magical day would come?

Talk about idiocy.

Trying to claim fighting against the Taliban is “imperialism” is, again, idiotic.

No amount of hysterics from changes the fact that Afghanistan is, in fact, our ally; nor the fact that things there are substantially better than they were under the Taliban. Nobody said democracy was easy, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t worth it. The United States has obligations to its allies, and weeping because nothing has been handed over in a silver platter is laughable.