Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I've heard the mainstream propaganda media pretend that all who decline want to stay as opposed don't want to abandon family until they all can go.
There have been many stories about families that were split, some are US residents and some are not. Here's a story about a US resident that couldn't get his family out until a US congressman intervened, his wife and some children were not US citizens. But there he is vacationing in Afghanistan over the summer and flying back as if this was just a routine trip.
If you have specific some propaganda stories, let's see them.
Quote:
On Aug. 6, after spending the summer visiting his family in Afghanistan, Mohammad Wali kissed his wife and three children goodbye, headed to the Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul and boarded a plane back to New York City, where he lives and works.
But Mr. Wali’s family was among the lucky ones. Although he and his two older children are U.S. citizens, his wife and youngest child are not. He couldn’t imagine his children attempting to scale the airport’s fences to escape, as some others had tried to do, he said.
This event will not "create more “Afghanistans” for America." The mistake the US has made is thinking we can do nation building. It was not a mistake to send military forces into Afghanistan. The mistake was staying in the country when experts should have come to the conclusion that we were not going to be successful establishing a democratic country with a military that could defend it.
Where do you get the idea we were there for 20 years to do nation building? We were there to manage the threat of terrorism.
As we can clearly see today, we DID NOT ACCOMPLISH and WILL NEVER ACCOMPLISH the eradication of terrorsts. ISIS-K has been flowing over the Pakistan border into Afghanistan since the evacuation. ISIS-K set off the suicide bomb at Kabul killing 13 of our troops. al-Qaeda are in the Taliban government. Afghanistan, is once again, well on the road to becoming a haven for and reconstitution of ISIS-K and al-Qaeda.
Afghanistan is one of those countries which requires our permanent presence. Withdrawal will prove - within two years, three years tops - to have been an international and national security blunder of enormous consequence. We do not have sufficient "over-the-horizon" capability to manage this threat.
Aside from the invasion of Iraq which totally blew up the Middle East and has created an unmanageble refugee issue worldwide, withdrawal from Afghanistan as been - hands down - the dumbest thing this country has done in my lifetime - and I am almost 80 y/o.
Where do you get the idea we were there for 20 years to do nation building? We were there to manage the threat of terrorism.
As we can clearly see today, we DID NOT ACCOMPLISH and WILL NEVER ACCOMPLISH the eradication of terrorsts. ISIS-K has been flowing over the Pakistan border into Afghanistan since the evacuation. ISIS-K set off the suicide bomb at Kabul killing 13 of our troops. al-Qaeda are in the Taliban government. Afghanistan, is once again, well on the road to becoming a haven for and reconstitution of ISIS-K and al-Qaeda.
Afghanistan is one of those countries which requires our permanent presence. Withdrawal will prove - within two years, three years tops - to have been an international and national security blunder of enormous consequence. We do not have sufficient "over-the-horizon" capability to manage this threat.
Aside from the invasion of Iraq which totally blew up the Middle East and has created an unmanageble refugee issue worldwide, withdrawal from Afghanistan as been - hands down - the dumbest thing this country has done in my lifetime - and I am almost 80 y/o.
We have met the enemy and it is us.
So we need to have a force in each country that has terrorists, Syria, Yemen, North Africa. What exactly was the specific mission in Afghanistan the last 10 years, what could we accomplish with a few thousand soldiers. The 9/11 attack could have originated from any country, the people involved didn't even come from Afghanistan.
So we need to have a force in each country that has terrorists, Syria, Yemen, North Africa. What exactly was the specific mission in Afghanistan the last 10 years, what could we accomplish with a few thousand soldiers. The 9/11 attack could have originated from any country, the people involved didn't even come from Afghanistan.
Well....... lest we forget history..... the short answer is yes.
The U.S. put bases in Japan after their surrender in WWII. The U.S. also bombed Japan right after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. We were not anticipating an attack on Pearl Harbor and got caught with our pants down. Lesson learned.
The U.S. has bases in Germany, installed right after WWII. Do I even need to mention why?
There are numerous other bases in the Middle East, all with specific purposes.
Last I recall, Germany nor Japan have made any further efforts to attack the U.S. (or any other countries) and are actually allies of the U.S. now. Likely because they know that any attack against the U.S. is essentially going to be met with swift repercussion. Though that may not be the impression that they get any longer.
The U.S. has been EXTREMELY fortunate that we've had as few of attacks as we have, and we can attribute that to keeping our forces engaged on the terrorists turf instead of having to engage them over here.
We're never going to stop it, but if you want to keep the wolves out of the pasture, you'd better keep some sheep dogs in the mountains.
It does not appear you understand what a strawman argument is, or how a nation goes about winding down involvement in a war.
You keep creating new arguments to beat down, because you cannot deal with Biden's failures. Biden took 20 years of war against the Taliban, gave up, surrendered, and fled. This is not a discussion about corruption in the Afghan government, it's a discussion on how Biden destroyed the Afghan military's ability to fight, and then Biden surrendering to the Taliban. Then once he surrendered, giving the Taliban billions in US military weapons, he fled the country in an historic fashion, abandoning American citizens to fend for themselves against our "businesslike" enemy, the Taliban.
Where do you get the idea we were there for 20 years to do nation building? We were there to manage the threat of terrorism.
As we can clearly see today, we DID NOT ACCOMPLISH and WILL NEVER ACCOMPLISH the eradication of terrorsts. ISIS-K has been flowing over the Pakistan border into Afghanistan since the evacuation. ISIS-K set off the suicide bomb at Kabul killing 13 of our troops. al-Qaeda are in the Taliban government. Afghanistan, is once again, well on the road to becoming a haven for and reconstitution of ISIS-K and al-Qaeda.
Afghanistan is one of those countries which requires our permanent presence. Withdrawal will prove - within two years, three years tops - to have been an international and national security blunder of enormous consequence. We do not have sufficient "over-the-horizon" capability to manage this threat.
Aside from the invasion of Iraq which totally blew up the Middle East and has created an unmanageble refugee issue worldwide, withdrawal from Afghanistan as been - hands down - the dumbest thing this country has done in my lifetime - and I am almost 80 y/o.
Well....... lest we forget history..... the short answer is yes.
The U.S. put bases in Japan after their surrender in WWII. The U.S. also bombed Japan right after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. We were not anticipating an attack on Pearl Harbor and got caught with our pants down. Lesson learned.
The U.S. has bases in Germany, installed right after WWII. Do I even need to mention why?
There are numerous other bases in the Middle East, all with specific purposes.
Last I recall, Germany nor Japan have made any further efforts to attack the U.S. (or any other countries) and are actually allies of the U.S. now. Likely because they know that any attack against the U.S. is essentially going to be met with swift repercussion. Though that may not be the impression that they get any longer.
The U.S. has been EXTREMELY fortunate that we've had as few of attacks as we have, and we can attribute that to keeping our forces engaged on the terrorists turf instead of having to engage them over here.
We're never going to stop it, but if you want to keep the wolves out of the pasture, you'd better keep some sheep dogs in the mountains.
Comparing this to Japan and Germany isn't equivalent, that wasn't done to fight terror. Those countries were not going to attack us.
I am so tired of the argument that we need to invade other countries to protect the homeland. Yes we have been very fortunate to not have another attack but claiming it was because we had a few thousand soldiers in Afghanistan is not the reason, an attack could have been planned in any other country.
But if this is truly a danger then we need to impose a draft and have every citizen participate and let congress have a debate and vote on that action rather than using very lose authorization to invade.
Both republicans and democrats wanted is out of Afghanistan, 20 years was enough time for whatever the mission was supposed to be.
Comparing this to Japan and Germany isn't equivalent, that wasn't done to fight terror. Those countries were not going to attack us.
They also didn't continue to be a danger. The US did not continue to occupy Germany or Japan or South Korea to maintain suppression of those countries, but to protect them--with their hearty cooperation--from other countries (primarily the USSR, North Korea, China, and the Warsaw Pact).
The US was on friendly terms with Germany, Japan, and South Korea almost immediately. Soldiers could relax in the towns, marry local women, exercise with the local forces. The US was never on "friendly" terms with Afghanistan, and it was never going to happen. US soldiers could not even turn their backs on Afghanistan soldiers.
Japan, Germany, and South Korea don't really provide any analogies for Afghanistan. The missions and situations are totally different.
Well....... lest we forget history..... the short answer is yes.
The U.S. put bases in Japan after their surrender in WWII. The U.S. also bombed Japan right after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. We were not anticipating an attack on Pearl Harbor and got caught with our pants down. Lesson learned.
The U.S. has bases in Germany, installed right after WWII. Do I even need to mention why?
There are numerous other bases in the Middle East, all with specific purposes.
Last I recall, Germany nor Japan have made any further efforts to attack the U.S. (or any other countries) and are actually allies of the U.S. now. Likely because they know that any attack against the U.S. is essentially going to be met with swift repercussion. Though that may not be the impression that they get any longer.
The U.S. has been EXTREMELY fortunate that we've had as few of attacks as we have, and we can attribute that to keeping our forces engaged on the terrorists turf instead of having to engage them over here.
We're never going to stop it, but if you want to keep the wolves out of the pasture, you'd better keep some sheep dogs in the mountains.
Lol.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
