Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Taliban enter Kabul as Afghan government on brink of collapse

smh.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 225 posts

Re: Taliban enter Kabul as Afghan government on brink of collapse

#81

Post by WalterBright »

yalogin wrote: post #34
forgingahead wrote: post #27

I was told in January this year by many gleeful people they were so happy that "competence" was coming back into the US administration. What an absolute bunch of morons and their failures. *Edit: to answer the questions about "what should have been done instead", here is my reply from further down the page: I would have liked to see a withdrawal that did not turn back the clock 20 years to where we were in August 200…

Are you trying to blame this on the Biden administration? Seriously? What would you want to see happen?

The buck stops on the President's desk.

Re: Taliban enter Kabul as Afghan government on brink of collapse

#82

Post by pishpash »

bawolff wrote: post #53
CapricornNoble wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>>Why would we ever pour money into such a terrible, incompetent system? Not that the US DoD is in any way a model of efficiency, but I suspect you are vastly underestimating the difficulty of the problem set. Over the past 200 years, the British, Soviet, and American empires have all failed to pacify Afghanistan. Probably the Mongols and Alexander the Great struggled too, I need to dig into the history of those cam…

Does china really have designs on Afghanistan? For what purpose? (I mean this as an honest question, i don't know that much of the geopolitics of the region)

I don't think there were designs on Afghanistan, but these strategies usually work like chess, where having an opposing piece in one place constrains actions in another. Afghanistan is next to Xinjiang, where some subversive actions were demonstrated, so China ended up having to pay a lot of attention to the western front and therefore had less strategic flexibility in the near Pacific where her main interests lie.

Having said that, it didn't work at all. China patiently used those 20 years to develop its economy and infrastructure, locked down Xinjiang against subversion, set up Belt and Road, and gained strategic tempo in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait while the US got much too carried away in Central Asia.

Re: Taliban enter Kabul as Afghan government on brink of collapse

#83

Post by rjzzleep »

bjourne wrote: post #48
yalogin wrote: post #32

What a failure of the US armed forces here. 20 damn years staying in the country with the only 2 goal - to help Afghans build an army and help defend themselves and to eradicate the Taliban. They failed miserably in both. Trillions spent and many lost lives. Why would we ever pour money into such a terrible, incompetent system? Of course, the cycle keeps repeating itself and we keep growing the military.

Remember that it was 20 very profitable years for some. Check the stock tickers, see what companies stocks have skyrocketed.

A friend of mine went to Afghanistan to help rebuild over a decade ago. He said some of the funds they received for schools were then allocated to lonely concrete blocks without teachers or equipment. But all the contractors involved would go there to show off their amazing progress.

Remember that the companies you talk about are not the only ones that profited here. It's not that different from when Hillary Clinton was laughing at the camera and saying the greatest thing about Lybia's liberation would be that they would pay for the reconstruction.

Re: Taliban enter Kabul as Afghan government on brink of collapse

#84

Post by drran »

rvense wrote: post #13
leereeves wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just over a month ago [July 8] the President was actually arguing that the Afghan army would win: Q Is a Taliban takeover of Afghanistan now inevitable? THE PRESIDENT: No, it is not. Q Why? THE PRESIDENT: Because you — the Afghan troops have 300,000 well-equipped — as well-equipped as any army in the world — and an air force against something like 75,000 Taliban. It is not inevitable. ... I trust the capacity of the…

It's almost as though the American leadership doesn't really understand Afghanistan.

If a Muslim country will invade a Christian country, say Sweden, to improve democracy, what will happen when they will leave?

Re: Taliban enter Kabul as Afghan government on brink of collapse

#85

Post by laurent92 »

pjc50 wrote: post #62
CapricornNoble wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>>Why would we ever pour money into such a terrible, incompetent system? Not that the US DoD is in any way a model of efficiency, but I suspect you are vastly underestimating the difficulty of the problem set. Over the past 200 years, the British, Soviet, and American empires have all failed to pacify Afghanistan. Probably the Mongols and Alexander the Great struggled too, I need to dig into the history of those cam…

> multi-decade delaying action to stymie Chinese expansion for as long as possible? That wasn't in the original brief, and I've never heard it before in the 20 years? Frankly if it's an expensive unpacifiable area, let China have it. They can sink effort into an unwinnable war instead. Also, having consulted a map, how do you expect China to physically get there?

China, at least, is not limited by public perception, and will have no qualms about doing war crimes, and they will call it conquering.

On the other hand, it seems a lot of Afghan soldiers deserted to the other side. They see no upside to the new Afghan regime.

Re: Taliban enter Kabul as Afghan government on brink of collapse

#86

Post by crubier »

forgingahead wrote: post #43
yalogin wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you trying to blame this on the Biden administration? Seriously? What would you want to see happen?

Yes. Seriously yes. I would have liked to see a withdrawal that did not turn back the clock 20 years to where we were in August 2001, squandering all the blood and treasure that has been expended in 2 decades. "Explainers" are why this is happening - weak minded people who prefer marketing (appearance of performance) over results. Surprising to me considering the heated replies to the other thread on the front page a…

« Marketing over results ». Please explain to me how the results achieved during the previous administrations have been worth the enormous financial expenses.

From my point of view, the current policy of spending zero and getting zero result is much more efficient than the previous policy of spending trillions and getting microscopic results.

The mistake was starting this shitshow 20 years ago. And this is on the Bush administration.

Re: Taliban enter Kabul as Afghan government on brink of collapse

#87

Post by pjmlp »

jacquesm wrote: post #61
pjmlp wrote: post #11

I remember having seen a similar scene in a couple of times by now. I guess we will be getting an Hollywood version of the facts in 10 years timeframe. My heart goes to those that died for nothing, and those that will now face the revenge of Talibans.

Plenty of those that helped the Americans and other troops are now facing gruesome execution by the Taliban. Translators, people working for them in any capacity, teachers, they're all on the run fearing for their lives. Turkey is overrun by a wave of people getting out of Afghanistan.

Yeah really bad, and Germany is still doing extraditions there. :(

Re: Taliban enter Kabul as Afghan government on brink of collapse

#88

Post by pishpash »

pjc50 wrote: post #62
CapricornNoble wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>>Why would we ever pour money into such a terrible, incompetent system? Not that the US DoD is in any way a model of efficiency, but I suspect you are vastly underestimating the difficulty of the problem set. Over the past 200 years, the British, Soviet, and American empires have all failed to pacify Afghanistan. Probably the Mongols and Alexander the Great struggled too, I need to dig into the history of those cam…

> multi-decade delaying action to stymie Chinese expansion for as long as possible? That wasn't in the original brief, and I've never heard it before in the 20 years? Frankly if it's an expensive unpacifiable area, let China have it. They can sink effort into an unwinnable war instead. Also, having consulted a map, how do you expect China to physically get there?

The media narrative is only the cover story for the plebs and democracy/terrorism have been great ones over the years. US military actions around the world, especially decades long ones, tend to be strategic in nature. Although as some point out above, even that might be a cover story for Congress, and the real motive is private profit.

Re: Taliban enter Kabul as Afghan government on brink of collapse

#89

Post by sneak »

throwawaysea wrote: post #49
sneak wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s more a failure of the people who sent them there than the forces themselves. This is a management issue. For all of the failings of the current US president, getting the hell out of an endless, unnecessary war is a good thing.

I disagree that getting out is a good thing. It means a terrorist organization will control a nation and harbor terrorists once again in the future (remember the same Taliban sheltered 9/11 terrorists and is still allied with al Qaeda!). It means we lose a foothold in the region, militarily and economically. It means rivals like China expand their influence and force projection at our expense, since they plan to reco…

I have not seen one cogent argument why the US taxpayer should be funding the role of policeman indefinitely in faraway lands.

Terrorism in Afghanistan has zero to do with the US constituency.

A "foothold" is useless and unnecessary.

I feel badly for the Afghan people, but ultimately it isn't the US' problem, and never has been. If they'd like to have a civil war and get those assholes out, let them.

Post reply on HN