America in Afghanistan through 2024?

[sm625]

America will be in Afghanistan until America collapses ala Soviet Union. The same exact thing will happen because it is basically the same system that ran both countries into the ground. In 30 years, China will be fed into the maw of Afghanistan.

 

[werepossum]

You guys always have to go to extremes to try and make your point and that's hilarious.
No, I am not saying Afghans are more advanced and modern....

I was mocking the AF guy for not coming up with the non electrical pump.
He didn't problem solve very well

How do you imagine Afghans have been filling their tires and balls all this time?
Do you think there were no tires or balls in Afghanistan before America arrived?

You didn't read the article. They have a non-electric pump. It didn't work either, for the same reason (frayed hose wouldn't hold pressure.) And they could not fix it. No one even tried to fix it. And yes, they have electric or IC-powered air compressors for automotive tires, and some few people even know how to fix those. The point of the article is that the general population lacks the basic underpinnings of technical knowledge that we take from granted. Therefore, we are giving them technology that they are unable to understand. The point of the article is first, that unless we change two things - what we give them, and how we prepare them to use those things - we are doomed to failure. And second, that Afghanistan's tribal, hierarchical, authoritarian culture may well doom us to failure anyway. As long as Afghan culture dictates that one person is in charge and only that person may suggest or implement changes, that culture cannot progress in the manner of a Western society, no matter how hard we try. We can train some Afghans in technology and modern procedures - we're very, very good at training, in spite of what some think - but as long as those individuals are stifled by a culture that rewards family connections and status rather than ability, their contributions to Afghanistan are severely limited.

I was referring to werepossum too.

I don't want you to clean up anything, because I don't think you can do it. But then, you haven't tried. At least I've tried, despite your criticisms. You're armchair quarterbacking.

The article is a good indication of the general attitude of the military towards Afghanistan, given more credence by the fact that it was widely published in military circles. And even more amazing is that it came down from the top of my organization, which is tasked with providing all the training for those deploying in advisory\mentoring roles in Afghanistan & Iraq. The message is that it's an interesting, sometimes enriching experience for us, but we're not much closer to achieving our goals now than we were 5 years ago. And the Afghans are just waiting for us to leave so they can go back to doing what they've always done between occupations.

Just be be clear, I'm not a veteran. I simply have an interest in, and have developed some channels into, our military. But I do agree with your posts. And I thank you for your service.

 

[Schadenfroh]

In 30 years, China will be fed into the maw of Afghanistan.

Seems that their buddy Pakistan might be their Afghanistan. I can see them moving into Pakistan to "maintain order" in about a decade after the militants based out of Pakistan attacking their outer provinces become too much for them.

 

[chucky2]

China, like Russia, will have no problem 'doing what needs to be done' when they get into it with Pakistan. And, unlike with Russia, we won't be stepping in against China, even in a proxy role. China will either take Pakistan, or, infiltrate Pakistan to the degree they don't need to take it, it just does China's bidding (aka their b1tch).

 

[Lemon law]

Seems that their buddy Pakistan might be their Afghanistan. I can see them moving into Pakistan to "maintain order" in about a decade after the militants based out of Pakistan attacking their outer provinces become too much for them.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In all due respects, I think your post is wrong and shows how little you understand about the situation in both Afghaanitsan and Pakistan.

1. In terms of the Taiban or what the Taliban has become, its purely a home grown movement with no foreign ambitions. Point granted, the older Taliban allowed OBL and Al-Quida a platform to launch 911, and attack the USA, but they are unlikely to allow a respeat of that mistake. The Taliban before 911 was doing some really nutty things, but they only did them inside Afghanistan. As for the modern parts of Pakistan, Taliban ideas have no appeal, but inside the Tribal areas of Pakitan, its equally undevoped. And the Taliban can't expamd West into Iran because Iran will not allow it. But now the more modern Taliban is more driven by old Mujahaddin ideas of throw the forreign invader out.

2. As for Pakistan, a fear of India is the number one motivator, meaning Pakistan is not going to anger China, who they depend on to keep India in check.

3. As for your various tribal elders and your military sources, they simply don't understand how angry those tribal elders are at Nato for drone strikes. They may tell Nato things to makes them semi-happy, but they will never trust Nato because they are dangerous and undependable. But they may try to manipulate Nato into striking their regional enemies.

4. But the bulk of the peaceful Afgahan people that are really screwded, the Afghan government itself is rotten to the core, and if the Taliban does not kill them, then drug dealers will, and if they get tomlive another day, random drone strikes add to the excitment. In terms of protecting property rights, at least the Taliban and no one else gets the job done. Nor can or will Nato protect the people that side with Nato.

5. Getting back to that Ronald Reagan question, as Afghans will almost universally say, my life is far worse than before Nato came. And smell the coffee implications, as long as Nato tries to stay without being too small to hold any territory to make that part of Afghanistan better, there were always be a Afghan Taliban impossible to dislodge. Meaning the longer Nato stays, the longer Afgahnistan will be in total anarchy.

6. But military contractors will make a fortune is the only bright side. Helped by Leon Pinhead who is the latest idiot who thinks we can kill our way out of the problem. Until Nato betters the lives of the Afgahn people Nato will continue to lose. We filled 2 million body bags in Vietnam but we lost because we did nothing for the Vietnamese people. As we though supporting one corrupt Vietnamese government after another would get us anywhere. Its our limited Western mind thinking, as we have a top down straetegy and the Taliban has a down to the people level strategy which is more effective. Nato and the US military can win wars with ease, but what good does winning a war do if we lose the peace?

 

[Nebor]

5. Getting back to that Ronald Reagan question, as Afghans will almost universally say, my life is far worse than before Nato came. And smell the coffee implications, as long as Nato tries to stay without being too small to hold any territory to make that part of Afghanistan better, there were always be a Afghan Taliban impossible to dislodge. Meaning the longer Nato stays, the longer Afgahnistan will be in total anarchy.

Very few people actually think their lives are "far worse than before NATO came." And I think objectively it'd be hard to argue that. Just like before, the vast majority of the country's population is doing the same thing they've done for the past 1000 years, oblivious to any grand political maneuvering in Kabul or military maneuvering on the Eastern border of the country.

Those that live in the major cities have seen a massive increase in quality of life as the US has funded sewers, apartment buildings and generally just pumped several decade's GDP's worth of money into the Afghan economy in just a few years. Though this has also resulted in some massive shanty towns around the major cities as people come in pursuit of new opportunities and jobs, that's no different than any other urban boom in any other country in history.

The problem is we're giving them things and building things for them that the Soviets and Europeans did in the past. And we know that they're going to neglect\destroy them through lack of maintenance or the ability to repair them. The Afghans themselves know this, and most of them seem to have the attitude of "get while the gettin's good" until the US departs and the rest of ISAF soon thereafter.

 

[Lemon law]

You still don't understand Nebor, builing somthing around Kabul that will bcome a shanty town does no good if there is no government and a good number of the new shanty town dwellers are Taliban. And then Nato has to stay and flood the zone with technology that won't go away or fall into disrepair. Instead NAto plays wacKAMOLE SOMEONE ELSE AND ALL THEIR EFFORTS ARE WASTED.

The only thing permanent is the Taliban and the Afghan people knows that Nato and their technology are temporary. Until that changes, Nato is pissing into the wind. If Nato is unwilling to commit the resources to save all of Afghanistan, they need to pick a spot and be willing to stay. Once they prove to Afghans that technology is better in select small areas, even the Taliban will get with the program. Nor will Nato makes any progress until they ramp down Nato caused violence.

 

[Nebor]

You still don't understand Nebor, builing somthing around Kabul that will bcome a shanty town does no good if there is no government and a good number of the new shanty town dwellers are Taliban. And then Nato has to stay and flood the zone with technology that won't go away or fall into disrepair. Instead NAto plays wacKAMOLE SOMEONE ELSE AND ALL THEIR EFFORTS ARE WASTED.

The only thing permanent is the Taliban and the Afghan people knows that Nato and their technology are temporary. Until that changes, Nato is pissing into the wind. If Nato is unwilling to commit the resources to save all of Afghanistan, they need to pick a spot and be willing to stay. Once they prove to Afghans that technology is better in select small areas, even the Taliban will get with the program. Nor will Nato makes any progress until they ramp down Nato caused violence.

Judging by the content and broken structure of this reply, I'm going to say that you didn't understand what I wrote and I can barely understand your broken English. It's pretty audacious to accuse me of not understanding when I've seen it first hand.

Buildings don't "become shanty towns." Shanty towns spring up everywhere burgeoning economic activity brings in migrants, whether it's Kabul, Istanbul or Las Vegas. The housing market simply can't keep up with the number of people flooding into the cities to pursue a non-agricultural life. The cities are the areas that are governed, with police & army manning checkpoints and standing on street corners every 10m or so. The migrants coming to the cities aren't "Taliban," (a widely misused term by the way) they're regular people seeking economic opportunity.

But overall we're saying the same thing. NATO is failing to establish anything beyond regional, urban governments, just as every conqueror in the past has done. Time and experience have shown us that those governments have no lasting power without constant external support. When the support leaves, the bad guys come out of the mountains and crush the urban governments. Afghanistan isn't changing anytime soon.