US wonât be asking Taliban permission to strike terror groups in Afghanistan
Counterterror strikes from abroad will be cleared through the Taliban.
www.militarytimes.com
Last edited:
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Leaving Vietnam vs AFG
- Thread starter jmcquate
- Start date
www.militarytimes.com
Do you all think we will start to see PRC- or RUS-made air defenses showing up to counter US armed aircraft in Taliban airspace?US wonât be asking Taliban permission to strike terror groups in Afghanistan
Counterterror strikes from abroad will be cleared through the Taliban.
Are you being serious?
MANPAD's are already there along with AAA. Anything more sophisticated? Nope.
So, uh...yeah. Whoops!
"McKenzie’s remarks directly contradict Biden’s comments in an Aug. 19 interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, in which he said that “no one” that he “can recall” advised him to keep a force of about 2,500 troops in Afghanistan."
www.politico.com
"McKenzie’s remarks directly contradict Biden’s comments in an Aug. 19 interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, in which he said that “no one” that he “can recall” advised him to keep a force of about 2,500 troops in Afghanistan."
Top generals contradict Biden, say they urged him not to withdraw from Afghanistan
Gen. Frank McKenzie said that he recommended maintaining a small force of 2,500 troops in Afghanistan earlier this year.
www.politico.com
To be fair it’s quite plausible Biden doesn’t recall being told that or even what he had for breakfastSo, uh...yeah. Whoops!
"McKenzie’s remarks directly contradict Biden’s comments in an Aug. 19 interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, in which he said that “no one” that he “can recall” advised him to keep a force of about 2,500 troops in Afghanistan."
Top generals contradict Biden, say they urged him not to withdraw from Afghanistan
Gen. Frank McKenzie said that he recommended maintaining a small force of 2,500 troops in Afghanistan earlier this year.
Totally agree.
I’m mainly just interested to see how the usual suspects on here will explain this one away.
It’s also fascinating to me that both Milley and Austin testified that the Doha Agreement was bad for morale. Maybe true amongst the FOGO ranks because forever wars mean more promotion potential, more BOD seats, and better golden parachute retirement gigs at defense contractors. But who were they talking to in the ranks who wanted to go die needlessly in Afghanistan? A peace agreement lowered morale in the military? Seriously? Highly sus.
Afghanistan was beginning to look more like, in terms of foot print and casualties, the extended occupations and forward basing that followed in places like Korea, Japan, Germany, etc. I hardly think it has qualified as a "forever war" for awhile now.
So it was an Army of Occupation?
How many Army of Occupation troops were killed by enemy troops in Germany and Japan after 1945? What percentage of Army of Occupation troops were walking around their bases in Germany and Japan with loaded weapons?
In my mind, Korea is not like the others, especially among the DMZ.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_axe_murder_incident?wprov=sfti1
He certainly ate his opponents lunch in the last election though.
Anyways...it seems that our withdrawal was inevitable no matter who won the last election.
The Dem party maybe but only because Biden stayed in his basement for the vast majority of the time. There is a reason his handlers won't let him speak to the press or without a teleprompter.
That's an interesting characterization . . . .
It was a resounding success for the Biden crime family. The election that is. Afghanistan was an absolute disaster like pretty much everything else the administration has done.
Nice try. Re-read what I wrote. No elaboration should be necessary.
I don't know how many killed in Japan, but some number were. In the first three years of occupation in Germany 49 US troops alone we killed. Can't say how many total including Soviets, French and Brits. To get to the number of US killed in the German occupation you have to go back 4 years worth of Afghanistan deaths. So yeah, about the same number of deaths. I am not sure about carrying weapons in garrison in Japan. Can't imagine they didn't due to the Japanese fanaticism. In Germany our occupation troops did carry weapons.
The larger point is not the casualty comparison. It is the fact we left troops in those places to deter aggression in that region that was deemed a threat to the US. They have lasted for decades at a huge expense. No one calls that an endless war. You have no argument with me. Lots of smart people, apparently including our current military leadership, have said keeping the force level in Afghanistan where it was, about 2500, would be valuable to the security of the US and Afghans and deter terrorism directed at the west. Yes, a deployment to Afghanistan is more dangerous than serving in the 38,000 US military in Germany or the 28,000 in South Korea. But the costs are counted in more than lives.
It wasn’t a try. The countries you mentioned literally had Armies of Occupation. Troops assigned there got the Army of Occupation Medal. If you want to compare the troops there to what troops are doing in Afghanistan, you are comparing them to Armies of Occupation.
This was probably the only reasonable end point for the war in Afghanistan, but the American public has no stomach for it; both the act and the non-PC term.
Army of Occupation Medal - Wikipedia
So? And Afghanistan wasn't a war. Congress declares war and they didn't. Two can play games with words. I was comparing the "foot print and casualties" as a matter of costs to TWO different military operations. Occupation post WWII AND the long time forward basing in those countries. I am sure that was pretty clear to most folks reading my post. No going to waste any more breath. Thanks for posting on topic.It wasn’t a try. The countries you mentioned literally had Armies of Occupation. Troops assigned there got the Army of Occupation Medal. If you want to compare the troops there to what troops are doing in Afghanistan, you are comparing them to Armies of Occupation.
This was probably the only reasonable end point for the war in Afghanistan, but the American public has no stomach for it; both the act and the non-PC term.
Army of Occupation Medal - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Check.
Interested to hear your thoughts on why this isn’t possible in the future.