Taliban: we won the war

[cpwill]

Right, which is why it’s silly for anyone to insist that we need to go kill Brown people and destroy things in order to prevent (maybe) some future terrorist thing that won’t kill 600k people.

We certainly hope such an attack would not occur - but I'm not aware of anyone arguing that we should go kill brown people and destroy things in order to stop it from doing so; that is a strawman argument. I am aware of people arguing that we should:

1. Maintain a kinetic strike and intelligence collection capability inside of Afghanistan in order to allow the future detection and disruption of EXOPS plotting in that country, and that

2. Maintaining that capability requires aiding the Government of Afghanistan in its own fight against religious extremists in the form of the Taliban and ISIS-K.

right right, tribe narrative sheeple blah blah blah. You guys spend all day regurgitating the same failed talking points Ben Shapiro and Tucker Carlson told you to be mad about, which they got from Rush Limbaugh 20 years ago.

Nothing new under the conservative-argument-sphere.

I couldn't tell you what Shapiro or Carlson says, as I don't listen to either of them, and the last time I think I listened to Rush was about 2010.

I do, however, know a little bit about foreign policy and perhaps a little bit about Afghanistan, having deployed there multiple times and studied it professionally.

 

[Jredbaron96]

Parking an aircraft carrier and issuing ultimatums probably would have worked.

And again, you offer no actual proof that it would.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

And again, you offer no actual proof that it would.

No proof required. Force is the only thing despots understand. While success is not guaranteed, it would have been far more effective then writing love letters to the Ayatollah appealing to his religion.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

We certainly hope such an attack would not occur - but I'm not aware of anyone arguing that we should go kill brown people and destroy things in order to stop it from doing so; that is a strawman argument. I am aware of people arguing that we should:

1. Maintain a kinetic strike and intelligence collection capability inside of Afghanistan in order to allow the future detection and disruption of EXOPS plotting in that country, and that

2. Maintaining that capability requires aiding the Government of Afghanistan in its own fight against religious extremists in the form of the Taliban and ISIS-K.



I couldn't tell you what Shapiro or Carlson says, as I don't listen to either of them, and the last time I think I listened to Rush was about 2010.

I do, however, know a little bit about foreign policy and perhaps a little bit about Afghanistan, having deployed there multiple times and studied it professionally.

If you say so.

 

[Jredbaron96]

Force is the only thing despots understand.

The Iranians received plenty of force over the course of eight years, far more than a carrier battle group could dispense, and it didn't work.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

The Iranians received plenty of force over the course of eight years, far more than a carrier battle group could dispense, and it didn't work.

From a third world nation as backwards as they were. Last time I checked, Iraq did not have an aircraft carrier or the most powerful and technological military on the planet.

 

[Jredbaron96]

From a third world nation as backwards as they were.

Iraq invaded Iran with hundreds of thousands of troops, thousands of armored vehicles, thousands of artillery pieces, and hundreds of combat aircraft. At the peak of the war the Iraqis were dropping poison gas on the Iranians, bombing their cities with bombs and ballistic missiles, and ran power cables through marshes to electrocute Iranian divers. We don't know how many Iranians died in the war, but it was probably 300,000-500,000.

And you think a single aircraft carrier will make the Iranians piss their pants in fear. FYI, in 1971 we stuck a carrier off the Indian coast to scare them into not stomping the Pakistanis. It didn't work.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Iraq invaded Iran with hundreds of thousands of troops, thousands of armored vehicles, thousands of artillery pieces, and hundreds of combat aircraft. At the peak of the war the Iraqis were dropping poison gas on the Iranians, bombing their cities with bombs and ballistic missiles, and ran power cables through marshes to electrocute Iranian divers. We don't know how many Iranians died in the war, but it was probably 300,000-500,000.

Once again, and probably for the last time, Iraq and Iran were and still are two third world nations. Both were led by brutal dictators and neither had the capability of destroying the other. The world's most powerful military parking an aircraft carrier nearby and issuing serious ultimatums would almost certainly have gained their attention. It certainly would have had tons more chance of success then a weak lily livered president writing letters attempting to appeal to the Ayatollah's religion.

 

[Jredbaron96]

The world's most powerful military parking an aircraft carrier nearby and issuing serious ultimatums would almost certainly have gained their attention.

I just provided an example of a third world nation completely ignoring the presence of an American aircraft carrier off their shores.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

I just provided an example of a third world nation completely ignoring the presence of an American aircraft carrier off their shores.

That was one third world nation not holding American hostages. The Indians had little to fear.

 

[Jredbaron96]

That was one third world nation not holding American hostages. The Indians had little to fear.

The Indians were attacking a nation that was commonly viewed as titled towards America.

Again, you have no proof that a carrier presence would have made the Iranians back down.

 

[Common Sense 1]

Maybe we should stop respecting our troops so much until they do better and start actually winning some of these things.

Silly post. The troops follow orders that come from our stupid politicians in Washington. Many of the troops serving have been wounded and killed. Soldiers, Airmen (women) and marines have served with dedication and honor!
Thank a vet!

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

The Indians were attacking a nation that was commonly viewed as titled towards America.

Again, you have no proof that a carrier presence would have made the Iranians back down.

There would have been no guarantees, however backed up by ultimatums and action if needed, it certainly would have had more effect then love letters to the ayatollah.

 

[Jredbaron96]

There would have been no guarantees,

You're right, the only guarantee here is that you will keep trying to pretend that would work and try to shit on the Carter Administration.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

Silly post. The troops follow orders that come from our stupid politicians in Washington. Many of the troops serving have been wounded and killed. Soldiers, Airmen (women) and marines have served with dedication and honor!
Thank a vet!

Why? Nothing any vet has done in the last 30-40 years has made us any safer. Their actions in the ME actually put more American lives in danger.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

You're right, the only guarantee here is that you will keep trying to pretend that would work and try to shit on the Carter Administration.

Now you are just tossing empty rhetoric. I was around as an adult when Carter was president. His failure to forcefully act not only led to the hostages being held 445 days, it led to the radical Islamic impression that America was weak and ultimately many more western hostages were taken. And no pretending is needed to point out that righting love letters to the Ayatollah did not work. Do keep in mind, President Elect Reagan had the image of a cowboy and the Iranians holding Americans hostage did fear him. The hostages themselves used that against their captors. It's not a coincidence that the hostages were released the day Reagan took office. They knew Carter was weak. They were not so sure about Reagan. When Carter did finally okay a rescue mission, I gave him kudos, however he held off that approval for six months and it failed largely due to very poor weather conditions compared to when it was first planned. I have always thought of President Carter as a decent and honest man...he was just an incompetent president.

 

[Jredbaron96]

Now you are just tossing empty rhetoric. I was around as an adult when Carter was president.

Good for you. I was alive when 9/11 happened, but that does not make me an expert on the war on terror.

It's not a coincidence that the hostages were released the day Reagan took office.

The same administration that illegally sold weapons to Iran. Right.

however he held off that approval for six months and it failed largely due to very poor weather conditions compared to when it was first planned.

Eagle Claw was a disaster of an operation that would never have gotten the go ahead in modern day SOF.

 

[joluoto]

Mapping the Afghan war, while murky, points to Taliban gains​

And this is the reason the Talebans lost interest in peace talks with the Afghan government. They are winning. The Talebans started a series of offensives in 2018 (most of them went just: they showed up, the government forces left), while still in negotiations with the US and the Afghan government, they got what they want from the US, and see no need for further talk with Kabul.

 

[Ringo Stalin]

"The US Embassy in Afghanistan has begun to reduce staff amid growing threats to American diplomatic workers"

Preparing to leave before the Kabul massacre? They leave their "allies" for meat. However, everything as usual...

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Good for you. I was alive when 9/11 happened, but that does not make me an expert on the war on terror.

No, however it does make you aware of what went on during that time period and leaves you less vulnerable to bullshit.

The same administration that illegally sold weapons to Iran. Right.

Yes, that was certainly a scandal, however it has no bearing on whether the Iranians feared what Reagan would do to them if our embassy personnel were still hostage when he took over.

Eagle Claw was a disaster of an operation that would never have gotten the go ahead in modern day SOF.

It certainly was a disaster as it was held up by Carter until conditions were not favorable. And your suggestion that such a rescue mission would not have been approved today, that's conjecture on your part. More dangerous ops have been approved and carried out since. To Carter's credit, he did tell the commander of the rescue mission that he would take responsibility for any failure. I just wish he had approved it when the unit was first ready to go.

 

[Jredbaron96]

No, however it does make you aware of what went on during that time period and leaves you less vulnerable to bullshit.

I've met people who were around in the Korean War and couldn't tell me the most basic facts about it. That doesn't really mean much.

And your suggestion that such a rescue mission would not have been approved today, that's conjecture on your part.

No, it's truth. Eagle Claw was a walking disaster that never would have been approved by a capable SOF community, but in the 1970s they were still recovering from the post-Vietnam issues.

There was no real intel on the actual target, what intel they had was badly insufficient, and quite literally we're just going to try to wing it as best they could once they reached Tehran.

I mean the first clue that the plan was awful was that Desert One was supposed to be an empty road where the helos could refuel in peace, instead it turned out to be a regularly trafficked area that forced the team to detain an entire busload of people. On top of that, there wasn't actually a designated commander for Desert One, so nobody knew who was actually in charge tat that point.

The list goes on and on. The fact that they couldn't get something as simple as the starting point right illustrates how poorly the actually more complex insertion and recovery mission would have went.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

I've met people who were around in the Korean War and couldn't tell me the most basic facts about it. That doesn't really mean much.


No, it's truth. Eagle Claw was a walking disaster that never would have been approved by a capable SOF community, but in the 1970s they were still recovering from the post-Vietnam issues.

There was no real intel on the actual target, what intel they had was badly insufficient, and quite literally we're just going to try to wing it as best they could once they reached Tehran.

I mean the first clue that the plan was awful was that Desert One was supposed to be an empty road where the helos could refuel in peace, instead it turned out to be a regularly trafficked area that forced the team to detain an entire busload of people. On top of that, there wasn't actually a designated commander for Desert One, so nobody knew who was actually in charge tat that point.

The list goes on and on. The fact that they couldn't get something as simple as the starting point right illustrates how poorly the actually more complex insertion and recovery mission would have went.

Detaining the busload of people was not the issue. The weather was. Had the op been carried out when first ready, it stood a decent chance of success. We can agree to disagree on that, however the point is, had Carter acted forcefully in the beginning, a rescue mission would never have been necessary.

 

[Jredbaron96]

Detaining the busload of people was not the issue.

Yes, it is a very big issue when the entire reason for choosing Desert One was because it was supposed to be empty.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Yes, it is a very big issue when the entire reason for choosing Desert One was because it was supposed to be empty.

No it was not. They simply detained those on the bus and when the mission failed over weather issues, those on the bus were released. The mission did not fail over detaining a bus.

 

[Jredbaron96]

No it was not. They simply detained those on the bus and when the mission failed over weather issues, those on the bus were released. The mission did not fail over detaining a bus.

Are you having trouble reading? Do you not understand that it's not a sign of good planning when there's a busload of people on a road intel said was supposed to be abandoned?