Here
and
Now

opinions

How Afghan war showed limits of U.S. military power

15 Comments
By ROBERT BURNS

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.


15 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

The US easily could have stabilized Afghanistan if it wanted to, but instead it tried to bandage the new wounds that kept arising almost daily.

Trump was right to not trust Afghanistan's leader.

This current whispering administration has no established Afghanistan policy, and so there will be chaos that will be "reacted" too.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

"Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it."

Anyone remember the wars in Southeast Asia? What did those wars accomplish? Over a million dead Vietnamese, almost 60,000 dead Americans, for what? Today, when I go shopping, some of the best shirts are imported from our former enemy, Vietnam. Is that what we fought a war for?

It is not that I like or admire the Taliban, but why did we attack them? Because they did not partake in the attacks on us on 9/11? Because they offered to try Osama bin Laden in one of their courts, instead of one of ours? Or was it a calculated attempt to make Pres. Bush look like a competent leader?

As for the 45th US President, any sentence with the words "Trump was right....." in it is automatically suspect, to say the least.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

The US lost Afghanistan the day it invaded Iraq. If the US had committed the resources to Afghanistan it devoted to Iraq the US would not be in this current situation and the whole of the Middle East would be a lot more calm than it is today. Invading Iraq sucked up the resources needed to win in Afghanistan and worse, opened a Pandora's box of ethnic warfare in the rest of the Middle East.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

lets start from this point.

attack on Afganistan was violation of international law.

US army and its allies are in position of agressor.

there is no evidence that afgani gov was behind some terrorist attacks in NY.

these lines above are FACTS.

lets talk more facts.

lets talk abt how many human lives were lost both on side of afghani citizens and aggressors.

lets talk abt cost for all of this "adventure".

lets talk about "victorious" non hollywood movie ending/similar to "brave" escape from Saigon some years ago/

lets talk abt who is responsible for all of this and who will pay for damages caused???

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Had the US gone all out and totally neutralized the opposition, this war could have been over in months.

But military strategy is dictated not by strategists, but by war profiteers who profit from arms sales and logistic support services.

Modern day wars are not fought for flag, country, or ideals but for the profit of elite arms dealers who control the narrative and hire lobbyists to ensure legislative approval.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Had the US gone all out and totally neutralized the opposition, this war could have been over in months.

This is precisely why you failed. You still don't seem to understand that there was never an enemy capable of being defeated. The Taliban were an honest reflection of the traditional Islamic tribal values that most Afghans (especially in rural areas) still wish to live by. Unless you're prepared to genocide the majority of Afghans, the Taliban will always reconstitute and reassert itself in some form or another.

The mistake America made was to assume that the Taliban leadership were a parasitic elite hated by ordinary people that wouldn't be missed if they were decapitated in an airstrike. In otherwords, Americans wrongly assumed that Afghanistan was just like America.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Karl Eikenberry, a retired Army lieutenant general with a rare combination of high-level military and diplomatic experience in Afghanistan, said the U.S. military initially balked at an open-ended mission of nation-building in an impoverished country traumatized by decades of civil war.

“But it warmed to the task,” he said, and the United States became further entangled as it pursued a military strategy not informed by realistic policy debates in Washington about what outcome was achievable and at what cost.

By numbers alone, the costs were enormous. Tens of thousands of Afghan government forces and civilians were killed. The United States lost more than 2,440 troops, and the allies lost more than 1,100. The U.S. spent hundreds of billions, and even after the withdrawal, the Biden administration plans to ask Congress to spend billions more in support of Afghan soldiers — even to continue paying their salaries.

Religious extremism , cultivated over centuries, has sufferance, they are astute at play the waiting game.

They hid in the shadows, for this current US administration its back to square one.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

That is completely wrong. The U.S. military power is still enormous and in principle without any limits. The ‘only’ problems in Afghanistan were, that they had no strategy for going in, no strategy at all while having been there for 20 years and also no strategy for what is to do now , the time after having almost completely gone out. In fact that possible mission success was missed right from the beginning.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This really should have served as a warning for what was to come.......

The Soviet War in Afghanistan, 1979 - 1989

https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2014/08/the-soviet-war-in-afghanistan-1979-1989/100786/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How Afghan war showed limits of U.S. military power

In retrospect, this title is misleading. US military power is unsurpassed by any other country. It keeps China, Russia, North Korea, Iran etc, in check. It is what made the world stand up extra straight when Trump was in office, because for the first time in a long time we had a power leader in charge of that military power.

The problem in Afghanistan was the US limited itself as to how it used that power.

We should have used tactical nuclear weapons, plain and simple.

1glennToday  08:58 am JST

As for the 45th US President, any sentence with the words "Trump was right....." in it is automatically suspect, to say the least.

Totally agree CRT inspired libs would think this.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

> How Afghan war showed limits of U.S. military power

In retrospect, this title is misleading. US military power is unsurpassed by any other country. 

No, the title isn’t misleading at all. You’re understanding of the logical inferences available from the title is incorrect.

We should have used tactical nuclear weapons, plain and simple.

Yeah, because setting that precedent would be a great idea. Not to mention it wouldn’t have actually worked at all given our adversaries were hidden amongst the populace.

Totally agree CRT inspired libs would think this.

Only Fix “News” addled conservatives would bring CRT which they really don’t understand, and not this conversation.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

P. SmithToday  05:58 pm JST

No, the title isn’t misleading at all. You’re understanding of the logical inferences available from the title is incorrect.

Wrong. It's called reading comprehension.

And as I mentioned way back, I was there.

Yeah, because setting that precedent would be a great idea. Not to mention it wouldn’t have actually worked at all given our adversaries were hidden amongst the populace.

No, not true entirely. As mentioned, I was there dude--saw it with my own eyes and participated with my own body. Taliban would just cross over into Pakistan at key stages. Maybe 5-6 years ago Pakistan tried to check these crossings with the Durand line or whatever; was out then so didn't care.

Only Fix “News” addled conservatives would bring CRT which they really don’t understand, and not this conversation.

Anyone who understands CRT and is still pro-CRT--well, CNN has an open guest seat available right between AOC and Omar.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Wrong. It's called reading comprehension.

Which you clearly struggle with given the headline doesn’t say that US military power is less than any other country.

And as I mentioned way back, I was there.

Sure.

No, not true entirely. As mentioned, I was there dude--saw it with my own eyes and participated with my own body. Taliban would just cross over into Pakistan at key stages. Maybe 5-6 years ago Pakistan tried to check these crossings with the Durand line or whatever; was out then so didn't care.

You’re advocating using nuclear weapons. I’ll leave it at that.

Anyone who understands CRT and is still pro-CRT--well, CNN has an open guest seat available right between AOC and Omar.

What is your understanding of CRT? If it accords with what Fox “News” spews, I know your understanding is incorrect.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

P. SmithToday  06:19 pm JST

Which you clearly struggle with given the headline doesn’t say that US military power is less than any other country.

Who is struggling? Because I didn't write that, Hilarious!

Sure.

Iraq too bud. Your comment would have been more relevant concerning that country btw. Go look at my past posts.

You’re advocating using nuclear weapons. I’ll leave it at that.

You should.

What is your understanding of CRT? If it accords with what Fox “News” spews, I know your understanding is incorrect.

It's wrong. Think differently? AOC and Omar are waiting for you.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

P. SmithToday  07:06 pm JST

Good thing that’s not how a country is defined or you’d have a point.

That's my point--that is how Afghanistan is defined.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites