Is it time to cut our losses ?

[The emperor has no clothes]

I must admit there are things I agree with Trump on. It's time to end stupid wars. We are never going to civilize, modernize the Afghans to the point of anything close to working democracy. What is our possible end game ? I wonder if he will hold true tonight ?

[The emperor has no clothes]

I'm confused again. Did anything change in policy ?

[Valkorado]

I'm confused again. Did anything change in policy ?

Well, Pakistan probably thinks things have a different "feel" after that speech! He pretty much called them out. "No place to hide". Also, not a time based but a position based strategy.  No more telegraphing.  Different rules of engagement altogether!   

[The emperor has no clothes]

I'm confused again. Did anything change in policy ?

Well, Pakistan probably thinks things have a different "feel" after that speech! He pretty much called them out. "No place to hide". Also, not a time based but a position based strategy.  No more telegraphing.  Different rules of engagement altogether!   

So, we are not getting out ?

[Crackerborn]

I didn't watch the Orange Man speak tonight since it is more entertaining to listen to the nay and yea soothsayers try to spin what was said. Even if the Orange Man wants to get the military out of the cesspool of Afghanistan, there may be compelling military and/or political reasons that prevent that wish from happening. There is likely more on the table than John Q. Public is aware and the powers-that-want-to-be need a military presence in that part of the world so the cave dwellers don't forget who slices their mutton. After all, we really don't need another JV team like ISIL popping up in the Mid-East. I think the previous administration also said they were going to pull the military out of Afghanistan but did not.

Compromise is the backbone of our political system, even if many seem to have decided that such old-fashioned foolishness is unnecessary. I will remain neutral on our current administration while "The Donald" learns that politics and politicians are not a private business and can not be run as one. Thankfully there seems no specific agenda in the present administration unlike the previous.

[rocketray]

how many empires have expired trying to win a war in Afghanistan?

[baldo]

I didn't watch the Orange Man speak tonight since it is more entertaining to listen to the nay and yea soothsayers try to spin what was said. Even if the Orange Man wants to get the military out of the cesspool of Afghanistan, there may be compelling military and/or political reasons that prevent that wish from happening. There is likely more on the table than John Q. Public is aware and the powers-that-want-to-be need a military presence in that part of the world so the cave dwellers don't forget who slices their mutton. After all, we really don't need another JV team like ISIL popping up in the Mid-East. I think the previous administration also said they were going to pull the military out of Afghanistan but did not.

Compromise is the backbone of our political system, even if many seem to have decided that such old-fashioned foolishness is unnecessary. I will remain neutral on our current administration while "The Donald" learns that politics and politicians are not a private business and can not be run as one. Thankfully there seems no specific agenda in the present administration unlike the previous.

I think there is definitely an agenda...it involves large amounts of cash flowing into his coffers. Those are our tax dollars, fellas.

[Hooter]

The middle east or any proponents thereof close by are "unfixable". I don't care if it's Trump as president or Fred Sanford,  you can't fix that place. Time to get out. As for N. Korea, if they were going to do something I believe they would have by now? I could be wrong but I think this little boy leader of their's is posturing? I hope I'm right.

I believe there is a plan. To not have something in the works would be foolish.  But we don't always need to be the male beagle looking for a mate. We always have our noses shoved up everybody else hind end. We have enough problems at home that need attention.  Lets take care of US first for a change.

[Serk]

Being a mostly non-interventionist libertarian I'm torn on this. On the one hand, this area is totally un-fixable. We can't civilize them and bring them into the society of respectable nations. Only they can when and if they want to.

However, the last time that place was abandoned and allowed to fester on it's own brought us the folks that flew airplanes into buildings.

What would their next idea be?

(Yes, I know, it was mostly Saudi nationals that actually DID it, but the planning, financing, command and control were all done from Afghanistan.)

I DO like, on paper at least, that President Trump says we're NOT doing nation building, we're just going over there to kill bad guys. Nothing more, nothing less.

I also like that he's calling Pakistan to the carpet on their duplicity of allowing a safe space for the bad guys to scurry across the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan when we come calling for them on the Afghan side.

I don't like that, from what it sounds like, this leave an open ended engagement with no possibility of victory other than us staying there and being the cops indefinitely.

But, when you've got a hornet's nest in your yard that you keep eradicating, but it keeps popping back up, you can't just walk away and ignore it, or it'll get even bigger and more out of control.

No easy answers, but I do like our current president's approach, on the surface at least, a whole lot better than the previous two.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Being a mostly non-interventionist libertarian I'm torn on this. On the one hand, this area is totally un-fixable. We can't civilize them and bring them into the society of respectable nations. Only they can when and if they want to.

However, the last time that place was abandoned and allowed to fester on it's own brought us the folks that flew airplanes into buildings.

What would their next idea be?

(Yes, I know, it was mostly Saudi nationals that actually DID it, but the planning, financing, command and control were all done from Afghanistan.)

I DO like, on paper at least, that President Trump says we're NOT doing nation building, we're just going over there to kill bad guys. Nothing more, nothing less.

I also like that he's calling Pakistan to the carpet on their duplicity of allowing a safe space for the bad guys to scurry across the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan when we come calling for them on the Afghan side.

I don't like that, from what it sounds like, this leave an open ended engagement with no possibility of victory other than us staying there and being the cops indefinitely.

But, when you've got a hornet's nest in your yard that you keep eradicating, but it keeps popping back up, you can't just walk away and ignore it, or it'll get even bigger and more out of control.

No easy answers, but I do like our current president's approach, on the surface at least, a whole lot better than the previous two.

Seems identical to the last 2 in my opinion.

[98valk]

so who on this board actually knows why we are in afgan and why the russians invaded afgan yrs ago?

[Serk]

Seems identical to the last 2 in my opinion.

Bush - Nation building with a side of untenable ROE.
Obama - Insane ROE that gets our guys killed with a side of nation building.
Trump - Kill the bad guys.

Or another way of putting it:
Bush - We've got to win their hearts and minds.
Obama - We've got to win their hearts and minds.
Trump - Once you've go them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Seems identical to the last 2 in my opinion.

Bush - Nation building with a side of untenable ROE.
Obama - Insane ROE that gets our guys killed with a side of nation building.
Trump - Kill the bad guys.

Or another way of putting it:
Bush - We've got to win their hearts and minds.
Obama - We've got to win their hearts and minds.
Trump - Once you've go them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.

Say what you will, I see no policy change since maybe 2004. Everybody just keeps kicking the can. It's inevitable, when we finally leave they will revert back. Just going to cost us more lives and money.

[Serk]

Say what you will, I see no policy change since maybe 2004. Everybody just keeps kicking the can. It's inevitable, when we finally leave they will revert back. Just going to cost us more lives and money.

I'll admit it's a sad situation we're in. We're almost to the point where babies born since this war started will be deploying to fight in it.

But what specific steps would President Head take?

[Alberta Patriot]

The Western World is fighting a Twisted Cave Dwelling Religious Ideology with Modern Weapons and Communications...both need to be cut off...now, how is that accomplished without calling out North Korea, China, Russia, Member States of the European Union, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Google, Facebook, Twitter, General Dynamics...did I miss any???........................   ..............................   .....................   ..........................   .......................
Show Me the Money Trail...I'll Show you a War that Nobody can win.

[Alberta Patriot]

Ohh...The Clinton Foundation

[The emperor has no clothes]

Say what you will, I see no policy change since maybe 2004. Everybody just keeps kicking the can. It's inevitable, when we finally leave they will revert back. Just going to cost us more lives and money.

I'll admit it's a sad situation we're in. We're almost to the point where babies born since this war started will be deploying to fight in it.

But what specific steps would President Head take?

Well, since you asked.   I sympathize there are no easy alternatives. But, I would pull out. And hopefully learn from our mistakes. If any country harbors terrorists that are out to hurt the US or our Allies, such as the Taliban did with OBL, we should hit them hard and fast. Then walk away. Screw the nation building. I just don't see how no matter what we do there, the outcome is going to be different. Unless we stay there forever.

[Alberta Patriot]

Say what you will, I see no policy change since maybe 2004. Everybody just keeps kicking the can. It's inevitable, when we finally leave they will revert back. Just going to cost us more lives and money.

I'll admit it's a sad situation we're in. We're almost to the point where babies born since this war started will be deploying to fight in it.

But what specific steps would President Head take?

Well, since you asked.   I sympathize there are no easy alternatives. But, I would pull out. And hopefully learn from our mistakes. If any country harbors terrorists that are out to hurt the US or our Allies, such as the Taliban did with OBL, we should hit them hard and fast. Then walk away. Screw the nation building. I just don't see how no matter what we do there, the outcome is going to be different. Unless we stay there forever.

The "Pull Out Early" strategy was tried by Obama and countless teen lovers all over the world...how did that work out.

[Savago]

I don't see value in wasting american soldiers lifes and billions of dollars in that corner of the world.

[old2soon]

They wouldn't let us win in Nam. lbj wanted to send messages.   I seriously doubt if we can win anywhere in the sandbox. And Even IF there is some sort of a perceived "victory" as soon as the coalition and the U S of A vacate the sandbox old rivalries WILL reignite. They've been fighting each other over there since the first humanoid picked up a rock. BUT we can NOT leave them to their own devices. We Should but we CAN'T. Short of the nuclear option I have NO idea how to contain Their Problems to their Lands. As Good a Warrior as General Mattis is I believe in the back of his mind he knows we Can't WIN over there. Victories like we've known in War I and War II I do Not believe are possible anymore. And I for one am tired of feeding our youngest and finest into the meat grinder that IS the sandbox. BUT I fer cursed sure do Not WANT those sonsabitches here beheading us. IF President Trump Is SERIOUS and Will Allow his Military Commanders to run that show as it should be run Maybe we can cut our losses. Make No mistake-we're still gonna lose people. I'm also curios about the end game/strategy. Also keep in mind Russia eventually walked away from Afghanistan. RIDE SAFE.

[Serk]

Well, since you asked.   I sympathize there are no easy alternatives. But, I would pull out. And hopefully learn from our mistakes. If any country harbors terrorists that are out to hurt the US or our Allies, such as the Taliban did with OBL, we should hit them hard and fast. Then walk away. Screw the nation building. I just don't see how no matter what we do there, the outcome is going to be different. Unless we stay there forever.

I guess we heard different speeches last night. Other than us fully walking away, that's basically what I heard President Trump propose.
No more nation building being the cornerstone.
To me it sounded like we're leaving, other than leaving the military equivalent of a police station there to kill the bad guys, that's all.
Not throwing money away on useless projects that will soon be owned by the bad guys.
Not trying to win hearts and minds.
Not building out nicer infrastructure than we have here.
Not being involved in their politics.

Just there to kill bad guys, that's it.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Well, since you asked.   I sympathize there are no easy alternatives. But, I would pull out. And hopefully learn from our mistakes. If any country harbors terrorists that are out to hurt the US or our Allies, such as the Taliban did with OBL, we should hit them hard and fast. Then walk away. Screw the nation building. I just don't see how no matter what we do there, the outcome is going to be different. Unless we stay there forever.

I guess we heard different speeches last night. Other than us fully walking away, that's basically what I heard President Trump propose.
No more nation building being the cornerstone.
To me it sounded like we're leaving, other than leaving the military equivalent of a police station there to kill the bad guys, that's all.
Not throwing money away on useless projects that will soon be owned by the bad guys.
Not trying to win hearts and minds.
Not building out nicer infrastructure than we have here.
Not being involved in their politics.

Just there to kill bad guys, that's it.

I guess we did. I heard "more of the same". Putting "advisors" in more forward positions with the supposed "Afghan Army" just means we are trying to prop them up some more. We can prop them up till the cows come home. At the end of the day when we finally leave, we still have the same outcome. If over 100,000 of our troops couldn't make much of a difference over there, what makes you think going from 8,000 to 12,000 is going to do much ?

[Serk]

I guess we did. I heard "more of the same". Putting "advisors" in more forward positions with the supposed "Afghan Army" just means we are trying to prop them up some more. We can prop them up till the cows come home. At the end of the day when we finally leave, we still have the same outcome. If over 100,000 of our troops couldn't make much of a difference over there, what makes you think going from 8,000 to 12,000 is going to do much ?

So we should just leave entirely and sit back and watch it collapse, until it gets to the point that we have to go back in again, making it even more difficult when we do?

If it was just a matter of walking away and letting them killing each other I wouldn't care one iota. But this area has shown a propensity for suddenly coming together and working towards killing us, here on our soil, when there's no one there watching over them.

[The emperor has no clothes]

I guess we did. I heard "more of the same". Putting "advisors" in more forward positions with the supposed "Afghan Army" just means we are trying to prop them up some more. We can prop them up till the cows come home. At the end of the day when we finally leave, we still have the same outcome. If over 100,000 of our troops couldn't make much of a difference over there, what makes you think going from 8,000 to 12,000 is going to do much ?

So we should just leave entirely and sit back and watch it collapse, until it gets to the point that we have to go back in again, making it even more difficult when we do?

If it was just a matter of walking away and letting them killing each other I wouldn't care one iota. But this area has shown a propensity for suddenly coming together and working towards killing us, here on our soil, when there's no one there watching over them.

No, what I'm proposing is we only go back and kill them when they gear up to attack us. Such as OBL did back when. I propose this would have more of an impact on the Taliban. If we go in and kick the crap out of them enough times, they will start to see that harboring them is not to their advantage. The Taliban mostly seems to be concerned with controlling their own barbarian country.

[Serk]

No, what I'm proposing is we only go back and kill them when they gear up to attack us. Such as OBL did back when. I propose this would have more of an impact on the Taliban. If we go in and kick the crap out of them enough times, they will start to see that harboring them is not to their advantage. The Taliban mostly seems to be concerned with controlling their own barbarian country.

Okay, but when we find someone who needs killing, we just rely on the Air Force and cruise missiles (And I guess those Navy types with their little planes and boats could play too) or do we send the Marines back in?

Here's my issue with that - Much as I love the Air Force, there's only so much you can do from the air, sometimes you need boots on the ground.

And if we've pulled out, getting those boots back in where they need to be becomes far more dangerous and difficult of a proposition.

So keep a force there, enough to easily and quickly whack the moles when they pop their heads up, no more.

[The emperor has no clothes]

No, what I'm proposing is we only go back and kill them when they gear up to attack us. Such as OBL did back when. I propose this would have more of an impact on the Taliban. If we go in and kick the crap out of them enough times, they will start to see that harboring them is not to their advantage. The Taliban mostly seems to be concerned with controlling their own barbarian country.

Okay, but when we find someone who needs killing, we just rely on the Air Force and cruise missiles (And I guess those Navy types with their little planes and boats could play too) or do we send the Marines back in?

Here's my issue with that - Much as I love the Air Force, there's only so much you can do from the air, sometimes you need boots on the ground.

And if we've pulled out, getting those boots back in where they need to be becomes far more dangerous and difficult of a proposition.

So keep a force there, enough to easily and quickly whack the moles when they pop their heads up, no more.

For how much longer ? Surely there must be an end ?

[Serk]

For how much longer ? Surely there must be an end ?

Until either they decide they'd rather kill each other than kill us, or until we've killed the last one of them, then we kill his pet goat and come home.

[The emperor has no clothes]

For how much longer ? Surely there must be an end ?

Until either they decide they'd rather kill each other than kill us, or until we've killed the last one of them, then we kill his pet goat and come home.

See, that's my problem. To me that means forever.

[Serk]

For how much longer ? Surely there must be an end ?

Until either they decide they'd rather kill each other than kill us, or until we've killed the last one of them, then we kill his pet goat and come home.

See, that's my problem. To me that means forever.

I don't like it either. But the only alternatives I see are to fully pull back and wait for them to attack us on our home soil, which is unacceptable, or pull partially back and just hover around the edges and doing little strikes here and there when they stick their heads up, which isn't much better than what we're doing now IMHO.

[old2soon]

We-U S of A-are trying to eliminate rooster roaches fire ants pine beetles carp-name an invasive species. THAT'S what we're up against. Whack a mole IS a good description. Has anyone ever won at whack a mole? Yeah-thought Not. RIDE SAFE.

[Willow]

Some of us seem to be missing the point.  There are people, groups, in this world that have decided they will be in conflict with the United States of America until it is gone.  We have the upper hand.  We get to choose whether the conflict will be on our own ground or on theirs.  I choose theirs.

It is no longer about winning (bringing it to an end).  It is about continuing to exert control on the evil forces in this world. 

[3fan4life]

The only way to win a war is to either annihilate the enemy or to kill enough of them that they get tired of dying and give up.

This is a difficult situation.

As distasteful as it is to be there.

We must be there.

Could that mean forever?
Yes it could.

How long have we had a prescense in Korea?

Can anyone sustanchably argue that we should've left  years ago?

[The emperor has no clothes]

The only way to win a war is to either annihilate the enemy or to kill enough of them that they get tired of dying and give up.

This is a difficult situation.

As distasteful as it is to be there.

We must be there.

Could that mean forever?
Yes it could.

How long have we had a prescense in Korea?

Can anyone sustanchably argue that we should've left  years ago?

There is a big difference between our bases around the world and in Afghanistan.

[3fan4life]

The only way to win a war is to either annihilate the enemy or to kill enough of them that they get tired of dying and give up.

This is a difficult situation.

As distasteful as it is to be there.

We must be there.

Could that mean forever?
Yes it could.

How long have we had a prescense in Korea?

Can anyone sustanchably argue that we should've left  years ago?

There is a big difference between our bases around the world and in Afghanistan.

Not really.

The bases themselves can be made safe.

I do doubt that the countryside of Afghanistan will ever become as hospitable as the countryside of South Korea.

But it would get better than it is now.

[Alpha Dog]

Being a mostly non-interventionist libertarian I'm torn on this. On the one hand, this area is totally un-fixable. We can't civilize them and bring them into the society of respectable nations. Only they can when and if they want to.

However, the last time that place was abandoned and allowed to fester on it's own brought us the folks that flew airplanes into buildings.

What would their next idea be?

(Yes, I know, it was mostly Saudi nationals that actually DID it, but the planning, financing, command and control were all done from Afghanistan.)

I DO like, on paper at least, that President Trump says we're NOT doing nation building, we're just going over there to kill bad guys. Nothing more, nothing less.

I also like that he's calling Pakistan to the carpet on their duplicity of allowing a safe space for the bad guys to scurry across the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan when we come calling for them on the Afghan side.

I don't like that, from what it sounds like, this leave an open ended engagement with no possibility of victory other than us staying there and being the cops indefinitely.

But, when you've got a hornet's nest in your yard that you keep eradicating, but it keeps popping back up, you can't just walk away and ignore it, or it'll get even bigger and more out of control.

No easy answers, but I do like our current president's approach, on the surface at least, a whole lot better than the previous two.

This is exactly where I find myself and I have for years.  Darned if you stay and surley cursed if you leave as the 20 terrorist groups in that region will gain a huge stronghold and bring more and more onto their side which could eventually number in the millions as the poor and brainwashed are easily persuaded.   Now Trumps approach if I read him right ( and I usually do ) is to take away the lawyers that have put a noose around our troops head for so many years now and change the rules of engagement and inflict wholly hell on the enemy.  Let the generals fight as they know how to and see if a difference can be made.

I also applaud Trump for putting Pakistan on notice and them putting out an overture to the giant in the region that may be able to help and that is India, a good friend of ours.  This is a whole new approach that may prove genius, maybe - let us hope.

It is a total shame that in the 21st century we still have a segment of a religion that has never had a reformation and is buried in the 7th century and does not care who they kill be it women or children, but that is who they are and better to fight them there then let them grow and inflict more misery around both the eastern and western world.  

[old2soon]

Make the cost to them-terrorists-too cursed HIGH for them to continue. He-President Trump-said last night we will no longer be telegraphing our moves. WHY on earth and in what galaxy is tellin yer enemy the When and Where of our next attack considered a good thing? That-telegraphing your move-Is the WHY of bombing haiphong harbor didn't work. lbj was afraid of pissin some one off. Last time I checked those that come in second in a war are called losers. I agree Completely with Carl-fight them on their ground. BUT as an aside-MAYBE no matter how this shakes out could be Prophecy needs to play out or IS Being played out. And I KNOW men have believed Prophecy was being played out eons ago. Also agree we Are in a-cursed if you do cursed if you don't-situation. I'd prefer the odds on a 200 to 1 longshot at Belmont. At least at Belmont I'd have a shot at a win!  RIDE SAFE.

[Reb]

The only way to win a war is to either annihilate the enemy or to kill enough of them that they get tired of dying and give up.

This is a difficult situation.

As distasteful as it is to be there.

We must be there.

Could that mean forever?
Yes it could.

How long have we had a prescense in Korea?

Can anyone sustanchably argue that we should've left  years ago?

There is a big difference between our bases around the world and in Afghanistan.

What difference?

[The emperor has no clothes]

The only way to win a war is to either annihilate the enemy or to kill enough of them that they get tired of dying and give up.

This is a difficult situation.

As distasteful as it is to be there.

We must be there.

Could that mean forever?
Yes it could.

How long have we had a prescense in Korea?

Can anyone sustanchably argue that we should've left  years ago?

There is a big difference between our bases around the world and in Afghanistan.

What difference?

Afghanistan is an active war zone, is it not ? Our bases in Germany, South Korea, etc. are not actively under threat.

[Reb]

The only way to win a war is to either annihilate the enemy or to kill enough of them that they get tired of dying and give up.

This is a difficult situation.

As distasteful as it is to be there.

We must be there.

Could that mean forever?
Yes it could.

How long have we had a prescense in Korea?

Can anyone sustanchably argue that we should've left  years ago?

There is a big difference between our bases around the world and in Afghanistan.

What difference?

Afghanistan is an active war zone, is it not ? Our bases in Germany, South Korea, etc. are not actively under threat.

For the number of bases and airfields located in Afghanistan, none are under immediate threat. I was stationed in Jalalabad in 2008. I'd say times then were worse than they are now. Other than the occasional rocket or morter attacks that were completely inaccurate. I felt pretty safe when I was within the compound walls. The same could be said for my short time in Kandahar and Bagram which were huge bases compared to J-bad.

In 2008, from what I witnessed, Afghanistan was entirely more of a special operations war. Probably because intelligence was still being gathered to locate public enemy #1.

[The emperor has no clothes]

The only way to win a war is to either annihilate the enemy or to kill enough of them that they get tired of dying and give up.

This is a difficult situation.

As distasteful as it is to be there.

We must be there.

Could that mean forever?
Yes it could.

How long have we had a prescense in Korea?

Can anyone sustanchably argue that we should've left  years ago?

There is a big difference between our bases around the world and in Afghanistan.

What difference?

Afghanistan is an active war zone, is it not ? Our bases in Germany, South Korea, etc. are not actively under threat.

For the number of bases and airfields located in Afghanistan, none are under immediate threat. I was stationed in Jalalabad in 2008. I'd say times then were worse than they are now. Other than the occasional rocket or morter attacks that were completely inaccurate. I felt pretty safe when I was within the compound walls. The same could be said for my short time in Kandahar and Bagram which were huge bases compared to J-bad.

In 2008, from what I witnessed, Afghanistan was entirely more of a special operations war. Probably because intelligence was still being gathered to locate public enemy #1.