President Joe Biden's United States of America

[gabe]

“There's going to be no circumstance where you see people lifted off the roof of an Embassy of the United States of America from Afghanistan” - Joe Biden, July 8, 2021

Today the Taliban are entering Kabul. Helicopters are busy airlifting staff out of the US embassy.

Helicopters are evacuating staff from the US embassy in Kabul as the Taliban enter the Afghan capital 'from all sides'

Helicopters are transporting US officials from the embassy, as Taliban militants enter the outskirts of the Afghan capital and fear grips the city.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

“There's going to be no circumstance where you see people lifted off the roof of an Embassy of the United States of America from Afghanistan” - Joe Biden, July 8, 2021

Today the Taliban are entering Kabul. Helicopters are busy airlifting staff out of the US embassy.

Helicopters are evacuating staff from the US embassy in Kabul as the Taliban enter the Afghan capital 'from all sides'

Helicopters are transporting US officials from the embassy, as Taliban militants enter the outskirts of the Afghan capital and fear grips the city.

www.businessinsider.com

Bad optics for sure, but unless they are willing to put in even more Bs and troops this outcome is inevitable.

AoD

 

[Richard White]

Bad optics for sure, but unless they are willing to put in even more Bs and troops this outcome is inevitable.

AoD

Some countries cannot be saved.

It's been known for years that Afghanistan could not provide it's own security if foreign troops left.

At some point you just need to cut the cord to avoid the situation becoming a dependency.

Unfortunately with Afghanistan, they relied on other countries without doing anything to help themselves.

Now they reap what they sow.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Some countries cannot be saved.

It's been known for years that Afghanistan could not provide it's own security if foreign troops left.

At some point you just need to cut the cord to avoid the situation becoming a dependency.

Unfortunately with Afghanistan, they relied on other countries without doing anything to help themselves.

Now they reap what they sow.

The history of the country (and even before it is a country) is rather complicated, to call this a "reap what they sow" moment is somewhat unjust, but in essence you are right that there are limits to the ability of outsiders to shape their destiny. Also, the Taliban is able to provide the security - it is just a form of security that we rightly find grotesque.

AoD

 

[Northern Light]

Bad optics for sure, but unless they are willing to put in even more Bs and troops this outcome is inevitable.

AoD

The outcome wasn't always inevitable mind you.

****

Now I don't think the U.S. or (us or any other 'allies') ought to have been there in the first place; at least in the manner that we were, but I digress

****

If a military power chooses to engage in a long-term operation, with the supposed goal of bringing democracy and a society more aligned with The West's interests..........

That power needs to engage on the scale of British colonialism in India. (No, I am not endorsing past British adventurism).

Rather, I'm saying such an effort can only succeed when you educate 2 or more generations of children in the desired fashion; and when you as an occupying force are seen as having delivered at least some worthwhile change
that people really want to keep. (schools, roads, clean drinking water etc etc.)

It requires institution-building.

Yet, the U.S. has had 3 successive long-term military campaigns that all show, seemingly, the same mistakes.

Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan.

All involved efforts to create a U.S. sympathetic society/regime.
All failed and in very similar ways.

Military efforts on the one hand that were grandiose in scale, yet half-hearted, paired with supporting corrupt local regimes that lacked popular support; and the failure to build
institutional capacity for something better/different; or build good will in the general populace.

I'm not sure about calling that poor record mistaken, when the choices made were wilful; and when the same poor strategy has been offered up 3 successive times.

At some point, once must conclude there is/was a desire to fail, or at least an indifference to victory.

 

[Towered]

The outcome wasn't always inevitable mind you.

****

Now I don't think the U.S. or (us or any other 'allies') ought to have been there in the first place; at least in the manner that we were, but I digress

****

If a military power chooses to engage in a long-term operation, with the supposed goal of bringing democracy and a society more aligned with The West's interests..........

That power needs to engage on the scale of British colonialism in India. (No, I am not endorsing past British adventurism).

Rather, I'm saying such an effort can only succeed when you educate 2 or more generations of children in the desired fashion; and when you as an occupying force are seen as having delivered at least some worthwhile change
that people really want to keep. (schools, roads, clean drinking water etc etc.)

It requires institution-building.

Yet, the U.S. has had 3 successive long-term military campaigns that all show, seemingly, the same mistakes.

Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan.

All involved efforts to create a U.S. sympathetic society/regime.
All failed and in very similar ways.

Military efforts on the one hand that were grandiose in scale, yet half-hearted, paired with supporting corrupt local regimes that lacked popular support; and the failure to build
institutional capacity for something better/different; or build good will in the general populace.

I'm not sure about calling that poor record mistaken, when the choices made were wilful; and when the same poor strategy has been offered up 3 successive times.

At some point, once must conclude there is/was a desire to fail, or at least an indifference to victory.

Precisely. If the US had been serious about achieving what you outlined, we're talking about a 50 year commitment at minimum. They weren't willing to do that. Now the poor citizens of Afghanistan have been thrown to the wolves. So what now? Once the Taliban consolidate their power, will they once again become a home base for international terror attacks so that the US will have to re-invade to dispatch them all over again? It's so stupid how they've handled this.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Precisely. If the US had been serious about achieving what you outlined, we're talking about a 50 year commitment at minimum. They weren't willing to do that. Now the poor citizens of Afghanistan have been thrown to the wolves. So what now? Once the Taliban consolidate their power, will they once again become a home base for international terror attacks so that the US will have to re-invade to dispatch them all over again? It's so stupid how they've handled this.

To be frank though, the US (and allies) went into Afghanistan to remove it as a base for Al-Qaeda, the nation-building bit just got tacked on with hopes and prayers. It should not ever have been sold as anything else but a punitive response.

AoD

 

[lenaitch]

They don't call Afghanistan the 'graveyard of empires' for nothing. The premise of British colonialism, for better or worse, was to go in and run the place. Any military action that doesn't have gain and hold real estate as it's goal will ultimately fail; all they did here was chase the Taliban into the hills or cause them to just blend into the population and bide their time ('you have the watches - we have the time').

NL's concept of 'two generations' is valid, but I think it would likely have taken longer here to eradicate the entrenched cultural history of corruption and local warlords. Add in the complication of Pakistan, a nuclear-tipped western "ally" (big quotes) that supported and gave them refuge, and the whole thing was doomed to ultimate failure. The US in particular dumped millions of dollars in training and equipment of government forces - it seems now all for naught. There are many account of anguish amongst Canadian veterans and NOK who committed dearly and are now wondering why.

“May God keep you away from the venom of the cobra, the teeth of the tiger, and the revenge of the Afghans.”​

— Alexander the Great​

​

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

They don't call Afghanistan the 'graveyard of empires' for nothing. The premise of British colonialism, for better or worse, was to go in and run the place. Any military action that doesn't have gain and hold real estate as it's goal will ultimately fail; all they did here was chase the Taliban into the hills or cause them to just blend into the population and bide their time ('you have the watches - we have the time').

NL's concept of 'two generations' is valid, but I think it would likely have taken longer here to eradicate the entrenched cultural history of corruption and local warlords. Add in the complication of Pakistan, a nuclear-tipped western "ally" (big quotes) that supported and gave them refuge, and the whole thing was doomed to ultimate failure. The US in particular dumped millions of dollars in training and equipment of government forces - it seems now all for naught. There are many account of anguish amongst Canadian veterans and NOK who committed dearly and are now wondering why.

“May God keep you away from the venom of the cobra, the teeth of the tiger, and the revenge of the Afghans.”​

— Alexander the Great​

​

It maybe a graveyard of empires - but frankly it is also a country with a terrible HDI (and other measures of general success). So long as they keep to their own business, I think the powers should stay away from it and stop trying remake it in their own image.

AoD

 

[Bjays92]

Regardless of your feelings as to why the US went their in the first place, this is the largest geopolitical failure of our generation. Not only was the 20 years there now all for naught, Afghanistan has been handed to the taliban at a time when it could not be more geopolitically strategic. Both Russia and China will now spark up friendly relations with the Taliban, and the US loses pretty much any influence they had near western china

 

[Johnny Au]

From RealLifeLore:

 

[Northern Light]

In other U.S. news, that nation has just declared a water shortage in the west.
With Lake Mead and Lake Powell (man made reservoirs on the Colorado River) reaching record lows.........
Quotas for access to water are being slashed.........

Mexico is even taking a hit.........

But Arizona is getting whacked.
They will lose 18% of their quota from the Colorado River which is about 8% of the State's water supply!

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/united-states-water-shortage-lake-mead-1.6143396

Expect fewer salad greens from Arizona in the winter!

 

[Richard White]

In other U.S. news, that nation has just declared a water shortage in the west.
With Lake Mead and Lake Powell (man made reservoirs on the Colorado River) reaching record lows.........
Quotas for access to water are being slashed.........

Mexico is even taking a hit.........

But Arizona is getting whacked.
They will lose 18% of their quota from the Colorado River which is about 8% of the State's water supply!

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/united-states-water-shortage-lake-mead-1.6143396

Expect fewer salad greens from Arizona in the winter!

I feel bad but there isn't much that can be done. In around 20 years the Southwestern US will be an arid desert.

 

[Northern Light]

I feel bad but there isn't much that can be done. In around 20 years the Southwestern US will be an arid desert.

A great deal will be done for those that live there (particularly California), though a mix of conservation efforts and desalination plants.
However, their agricultural sector will both have to shrink and change (to less water intensive crops).
Other places will have to make up for it with greater production.

I don't expect it to drive massive population shrink in the region, but its sure to inhibit growth and will probably cause some population reduction the most hard hit areas, likely in Arizona and Nevada.

Regrettably, this is something that could have mitigated in some measure had experts been listened too earlier.
I'm not even meaning climate change; but rather controlling the explosive growth in Arizona where there was no natural local water supply sufficient to sustain said development (same in Vegas)........

As well as not over-relying on such water intensive crops in parts of California that are naturally desert.

(Avocados, Citrus, Alfalfa, Almonds and Pistachios topping the list)

 

[afransen]

Agriculture is much lower value per unit water input than other sectors, so indeed that is what will be on the chopping block. Almond growers in California are ripping out their trees. We'll see it in higher prices particularly during the winter for produce as produce needs to be trucked from further away.