• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Trump addresses nation on Afghanistan strategy

Z

ZeoVGM

Banned
The fact that anyone could say anything even remotely resembling, "That was a pretty good speech," is just proof of how low the office of the president has fallen.
 
S

Spoiled Milk

Banned
NyMartin90 said:
There will not be any deadlines realistically. I don't think we can have timetables on this until we straighten out what will happen with the Taliban, which Trump actually acknowledged that elements of the Taliban will have to be involved in a diplomatic deal for the future of Afghanistan. He literally openly just said that they will be involved in talks with them, acknowledging how much political sway they hold. The Taliban as bad as it is has too much sway and can be isolated as a political party, like Hekmatyar has been recently.

I think the nation building is being thrown more on the Indians for economic reasons, but again as I said before this is dangerous. Pakistan doesn't want India in its backyard. The Indian embassy was attacked in Kabul for this reason alone in recent years.

Stability is not a timetable and it does seem endless but that's the realistic viewpoint here imo.

Yea its not going to end in this presidency (4 or 8 years) Trump will save face here like his predecessors and give it to whoever surpasses him.
Click to expand...
All good points. I want to add that the way things are in Afghanistan are really sustainable so worrying about endless war is actually the wrong mindset. The United States isn't involved in any other massive military conflicts, currently. Troop deployment in the region will barely be above 12,000 after this increase. Engaging other countries over time will allow the United States to disengage without causing security holes. So instead of asking if the US can afford to stay in Afghanistan, one should ask if the US can afford to pull out for no reason other than war-weariness and leave an unfixable situation.

Involving India in this way is a good way to put pressure on Pakistan - either play ball or get shut out of developing regional power structures. It's soft power at its best. I don't think it's dangerous at all.
jordan0386 said:
How do you just occupy someone's country and refuse to leave?
Click to expand...
they ask you to stay because their own troops keep getting blown up by the former dictators of the country
 
G

Glitchesarecool

Member
IpDAgCi.gif
 
N

NullPointer

Member
jordan0386 said:
How do you just occupy someone's country and refuse to leave?
Click to expand...
Because leaving doesn't honor the sacrifice of those who have fought and died to this point.

Which is the trap, because wanting that doesn't mean you can achieve it, and it comes down to how many more have to die to justify the deaths to that point, which only adds to what needs to happen to declare victory. That language echoes Vietnam, which makes me wonder what Trump understands about that time and the conflict.

He'll keep it going, push for game changer attacks, try to work out more money from the neighborhood, and hand it over to the next President as a work in progress but on the upswing (though reporting will say its not).
 
Oppo

Oppo

Member
Spoiled Milk said:
All good points. I want to add that the way things are in Afghanistan are really sustainable so worrying about endless war is actually the wrong mindset. The United States isn't involved in any other massive military conflicts, currently. Troop deployment in the region will barely be above 12,000 after this increase. Engaging other countries over time will allow the United States to disengage without causing security holes. So instead of asking if the US can afford to stay in Afghanistan, one should ask if the US can afford to pull out for no reason other than war-weariness and leave an unfixable situation.
Click to expand...
the USA has been in Afghanistan for 16 years. it's the longest war ever. your last question doesn't make any sense.
 
I

Iolo

Member
Justin Bailey said:
Ah yes, the quarterly Trump speech that gets the media to say "now he's presidential" for around 48 hours or so.
Click to expand...

His "pardon Arpaio" speech is in under 24 hours.

We know that muzzled Trump / teleprompter Trump I'd always followed by an equal and opposite Trump reaction, and he's been under a ton of stress in the last week.
 
E

Electric Eye

Banned
Bam Bam Baklava said:
There was no practical reason for this to be a primetime address.
Click to expand...

Wrong. They want to show that he can be restrained now that Bannon is out. Also miller just got his tires slashed too. Some people lost bets tonight 😆 But the week is young. The Arizona rally is the real test for this fucker he just can't help himself.
 
N

NyMartin90

Member
NullPointer said:
Thanks for answering. Appreciate it.

You too NyMartin90.

The feeling I'm getting is that the major significant change here is Trump. He's shifted from seeking to get us out of Afghanistan to owning it and making it an open ended commitment on purpose.
Click to expand...

Np I feel that all of these threads are just bashing on said politician but we don't actually get to discuss the policies, or in this case Foreign Policy which is very tricky.

Trump has shifted on this but for some to say its a nothing burger is far from what it actually is. Anyone who was expecting actual troop numbers from Trump or an immediate withdrawal has to look at this situation with a larger lens.

Also in terms of stability the Taliban must be brought to the table. They have infiltrated and are easily able to move throughout the country's institutions and infrastructure. Its so common that they show up in Afghan policemen or Afghan soldier uniforms and then cause havoc. They aren't going away anytime soon but there are some Taliban groups that want to negotiate and others are too hardline.
 
F

Fenderputty

Banned
NullPointer said:
No victory conditions. Nothing even that hints at practical realities. The closest he came to talking about how Afghanistan would look when we left was to describe "everlasting peace"..
Click to expand...

You would think he would give us some metric to use considering Victory was the entire reason he's increasing the troops.
 
K

Kin5290

Member
1) The surge seems like, while not a good thing, the least worst option. Bannon's idea to send in Blackwater et al is infinitely worse, would probably get more people killed on both sides and cost more (people are a lot less willing to die for money than for country, which means that there has to be a lot more money to make it worthwhile). And withdrawal would have been as disastrous as the last time the Americans abandoned Afghanistan and let the Taliban push over the weak government and the warlords.

2) This is basically Obama's strategy, only more honest. One of the ways that Obama dropped the ball foreign policy wise was by explicitly naming an exit date that he should have known the generals couldn't meet. So, it's not a "new" anything, just more of the same. It's also probably not going to do much at all but kick the can down the road for the next guy. A few thousand troops in Afghanistan is like trying to plug a sucking chest wound with a band aid.

3) Trump's appeal to India is a clear fuck you to Pakistan. On the one hand, Pakistan is basically the reason why the war against the Taliban is unwinnable, since the Taliban can just hop across the border for sanctuary. On the other hand, I'm not sure what this is supposed to accomplish. Wouldn't Pakistan, for fear of having India on one border and an India-friendly state on the other side, be even less incentivized to see Afghanistan attain any level of stability? Why would that threat make them any more willing to stamp out the Taliban?
 
J

jordan0386

Member
NyMartin90 said:
Np I feel that all of these threads are just bashing on said politician but we don't actually get to discuss the policies, or in this case Foreign Policy which is very tricky.

Trump has shifted on this but for some to say its a nothing burger is far from what it actually is. Anyone who was expecting actual troop numbers from Trump or an immediate withdrawal has to look at this situation with a larger lens.

Also in terms of stability the Taliban must be brought to the table. They have infiltrated and are easily able to move throughout the country's institutions and infrastructure. Its so common that they show up in Afghan policemen or Afghan soldier uniforms and then cause havoc. They aren't going away anytime soon but there are some Taliban groups that want to negotiate and others are too hardline.
Click to expand...

The USA destroyed Afghanistan. Cut a check and move on.

How many more Fathers have to come home in a box?

All those terror groups are/were funded by the USA. Why are you sword fighting those you trained.

Its the worst L of the 21st century. Its time to move on.
 
N

NyMartin90

Member
Spoiled Milk said:
All good points. I want to add that the way things are in Afghanistan are really sustainable so worrying about endless war is actually the wrong mindset. The United States isn't involved in any other massive military conflicts, currently. Troop deployment in the region will barely be above 12,000 after this increase. Engaging other countries over time will allow the United States to disengage without causing security holes. So instead of asking if the US can afford to stay in Afghanistan, one should ask if the US can afford to pull out for no reason other than war-weariness and leave an unfixable situation.

Involving India in this way is a good way to put pressure on Pakistan - either play ball or get shut out of developing regional power structures. It's soft power at its best. I don't think it's dangerous at all.
they ask you to stay because their own troops keep getting blown up by the former dictators of the country
Click to expand...

I agree with your point about the "war" its an occupation with troop deployments. War fatigue shouldn't influence the decisions that can make this a "vacuum" as Trump said. Yea I think I did use some hyperbole on the soft power but there are some elites in Pakistan who are extremely paranoid of "Indian Encirclement". Pakistan has conducted several military operations into the dangerous semi-autonomous NWFP but only after their own areas are attacked.
 
N

NullPointer

Member
Kin5290 said:
2) This is basically Obama's strategy, only more honest. One of the ways that Obama dropped the ball foreign policy wise was by explicitly naming an exit date that he should have known the generals couldn't meet. So, it's not a "new" anything, just more of the same. It's also probably not going to do much at all but kick the can down the road for the next guy. A few thousand troops in Afghanistan is like trying to plug a sucking chest wound with a band aid.
Click to expand...
I thought the deadline was predicated on the notion that the Afghanistan government wasn't really interested in protecting anybody but themselves, and that a date would force them to confront the realities of the situation once we left.

It doesn't seem to have had that effect, but I don't see how an open-ended commitment is an improvement.
 
N

NyMartin90

Member
jordan0386 said:
The USA destroyed Afghanistan. Cut a check and move on.

How many more Fathers have to come home in a box?

All those terror groups are/were funded by the USA. Why are you sword fighting those you trained.

Its the worst L of the 21st century. Its time to move on.
Click to expand...

Yes lets quickly leave and let the rest of the world deal with it until it comes back to attack us. AMERICA FIRST! /s

Getting into a war is easy but getting out without creating a bigger situation or making it worse than it was is tough. If you thought the Taliban regime was hardline in the 1990s, I wonder how bad it would be if ISIS took control of a weak government in Afghanistan next to nuclear armed Pakistan.

Also a "check" as you say it would solve nothing in Afghanistan. Money is not the only issue here. It is social along with tribal tensions.
 
N

NyMartin90

Member
Kin5290 said:
3) Trump's appeal to India is a clear fuck you to Pakistan. On the one hand, Pakistan is basically the reason why the war against the Taliban is unwinnable, since the Taliban can just hop across the border for sanctuary. On the other hand, I'm not sure what this is supposed to accomplish. Wouldn't Pakistan, for fear of having India on one border and an India-friendly state on the other side, be even less incentivized to see Afghanistan attain any level of stability? Why would that threat make them any more willing to stamp out the Taliban?
Click to expand...

This is the big fear if there is more Indian involvement you can bet that Pakistani ISI will be way more intent on hampering stability in Afghanistan. Although Pakistan has to look to its own problems as well. They have taken a large toll in the past 16 years themselves. They have to look at a long term solution and also come to terms with their "Indian war hysteria." The India Paranoia in Pakistan is a big cause of this issue.
 
N

NullPointer

Member
NyMartin90 said:
Getting into a war is easy but getting out without creating a bigger situation or making it worse than it was is tough. If you thought the Taliban regime was hardline in the 1990s, I wonder how bad it would be if ISIS took control of a weak government in Afghanistan next to nuclear armed Pakistan.
Click to expand...
And that's the rub. Leave and you allow ISIS to take over where they can. Stay and you give ISIS a reason.
 
I

Iolo

Member
As expected Trump basically set this up so that when it fails, he will blame it all on the generals, who were the ones that steered him down this path against his best instincts. Just like on the failed Yemen raid when he took no responsibility for the dead navy SEAL.
 
J

jordan0386

Member
NyMartin90 said:
Yes lets quickly leave and let the rest of the world deal with it until it comes back to attack us. AMERICA FIRST! /s

Getting into a war is easy but getting out without creating a bigger situation or making it worse than it was is tough. If you thought the Taliban regime was hardline in the 1990s, I wonder how bad it would be if ISIS took control of a weak government in Afghanistan next to nuclear armed Pakistan.

Also a "check" as you say it would solve nothing in Afghanistan. Money is not the only issue here. It is social along with tribal tensions.
Click to expand...

If the American Gov't cared, they woulda left already. Like 10 years ago already.

I ask again. How many more deaths should be added to the tally?

There is no fucking reason for America to be there. Leave. It's that fucking simple.
 
A

Aselith

Member
jordan0386 said:
If the American Gov't cared, they woulda left already. Like 10 years ago already.

I ask again. How many more deaths should be added to the tally?

There is no fucking reason for America to be there. Leave. It's that fucking simple.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the thing is there will never be a "good" time to leave. All we can do is leave and deal with the inevitable consequences.
 
N

NyMartin90

Member
jordan0386 said:
If the American Gov't cared, they woulda left already. Like 10 years ago already.

I ask again. How many more deaths should be added to the tally?

There is no fucking reason for America to be there. Leave. It's that fucking simple.
Click to expand...

yWbl746.jpg
Click to expand...

The occupation has seen less US troop deaths in the past few years. Notice I said occupation, we are not in a large scale battle focused war. I agree loss of life is terrible but if we leave the loss of life will be larger and we may have to revisit that country to remove ISIS down the road. There's no answer of how long it would take. The repercussions could be disastrous.

Like it or not this is the US' call on whether the Afghan government succeeds or not. They are way more susceptible to corruption and infiltration than the Iraqi government (which was basically a dictatorship under al-Maliki for his tenure) due to the tribal issues. Afghanistan's last election was mired in fraud. Stability is not easy to obtain but if we just leave it could become way worse.
 
J

jordan0386

Member
NyMartin90 said:
The occupation has seen less US troop deaths in the past few years. Notice I said occupation, we are not in a large scale battle focused war. I agree loss of life is terrible but if we leave the loss of life will be larger and we may have to revisit that country to remove ISIS down the road. There's no answer of how long it would take. The repercussions could be disastrous.

Like it or not this is the US' call on whether the Afghan government succeeds or not. They are way more susceptible to corruption and infiltration than the Iraqi government (which was basically a dictatorship under al-Maliki for his tenure) due to the tribal issues. Afghanistan's last election was mired in fraud. Stability is not easy to obtain but if we just leave it could become way worse.
Click to expand...

USA had 15 years to figure out stability

We refuse to fire our self for a job clearly not done to satisfactory
 
F

Fenderputty

Banned
NyMartin90 said:
The occupation has seen less US troop deaths in the past few years. Notice I said occupation, we are not in a large scale battle focused war. I agree loss of life is terrible but if we leave the loss of life will be larger and we may have to revisit that country to remove ISIS down the road. There's no answer of how long it would take. The repercussions could be disastrous.

Like it or not this is the US' call on whether the Afghan government succeeds or not. They are way more susceptible to corruption and infiltration than the Iraqi government (which was basically a dictatorship under al-Maliki for his tenure) due to the tribal issues. Afghanistan's last election was mired in fraud. Stability is not easy to obtain but if we just leave it could become way worse.
Click to expand...

So "victory" actually means perpetual occupation. Waiting on the Afghan government to stabilize may as well be just that. No end in sight
 
N

NyMartin90

Member
jordan0386 said:
USA had 15 years to figure out stability

We refuse to fire our self for a job clearly not done to satisfactory
Click to expand...

15 years to figure out stability is a very good way to describe this. Policies obviously change whenever we have a new administration so many things have been tried. For the last 16 years we have always said the Taliban "must be destroyed." Thats keeping them all bunched together. Trump repeated that tonight but added something his predecessors have not. In the speech tonight its clear that we've shifted in some ways by acknowledging that there is a possible political solution with certain elements of the Taliban.

Look at this quote from tonight:
Someday, after an effective military effort, perhaps it will be possible to have a political settlement that includes elements of the Taliban and Afghanistan
Click to expand...

This is big if there is to be stability. Political power for the Taliban to work together with their fellow Afghans would solve some of the problems they have been demanding since the formation of the new Afghan government.

Stability is not something easy to define. I just described a political situation but there are also socio-economic issues here and trying to stop radicalization.
 
O

O Canada Our Home and Native Land

Banned
Spending more on the arms industry when we already spend so much and the military isn't asking for more equipment. I'm assuming he is going to bring in more private contractors for expensive infrastructure projects that will be overcharged and poorly built then give the bill to the afghan and american people. Trump will be one of the most corrupt presidents. His ass better be in jail in the future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Digital Foundry: Stellar Blade PS5 - Digital Foundry Tech Review - An Ultra-Polished Action Game
32
3K
Vroadstar replied
Digital Foundry: Dragon's Dogma 2: Does The New Patch Fix The Game? All Systems Tested
44
4K
sachos replied
Is The Song "Kung Fu Fighting" by Carl Douglas Racist/Cultural Appropriation?
2
85
6K
FunkMiller replied
[Digital Foundry] Handheld PC Triple-A Gaming: Lenovo Legion Go vs OneXPlayer 2 Pro vs AyaNeo Kun vs Asus ROG Ally
Analysis Review
3
654
mckmas8808 replied
MVG — 'Half-Life on the PlayStation 2 is an incredible port. Here is why.'
Analysis Retro
20
2K
Red Crayon Aristocrat replied
Top Bottom