How is the Afghan army so inept?

You're living in some weird time warp where the use of nuclear weapons would accomplish something. In .the two most likely places where serious war might erupt (Ukraine and the South China Sea) the US has zero chance of imposing its will on Russia or China without the use of nukes. Our NATO allies will not (as the Afghans have not) risk having long casualty lists in Ukraine. Without them on board there will be no conflict with Russia east of the Dnieper no matter how badly Ukraine is losing there. Against China we are simply outgunned and outnumbered in the littoral areas over which China has asserted control.

This was all part of China’s plan to get Biden elected. Now they will roll in and take over as America runs away. The thing is the Chinese won’t be so nice and will do to the taliban like they do to the Uyghurs in western China.

Good thing America has been helping in the Middle East for decades, otherwise the Middle East might be unstable.

This is the graveyard of empires. The Chinese will make deals for scarce resources, but not try to take over overtly, same with the former Soviet republics in Central Asia.

Sounds like the strategic hamlet strategy in Vietnam.

This is spot on from 2017 in a list of the ten worst militaries in the world from a website called "military.com":

"10. Afghanistan

Afghanistan makes the list despite the decade-plus of training from ISAF advisors. The sad truth is that all that nifty training doesn’t make up for the fact that the ANA will likely collapse like a card table when the U.S. leaves Afghanistan — if the U.S. ever leaves Afghanistan. Not that they can’t fight, but they can’t do much else. One advisor told al-Jazeera:

“In fact, talk to any coalition troops on the ground and they will tell you the Afghans can fight, but only after they have been fed, clothed, armed and delivered to the battlefield by NATO.”"

The US failed experiment wrote:

Runningart2004 wrote:It's going to be a pre-9/11 Afghanistan all over again and with nothing to show for it.We needed to keep a permanent presence at Bagram and continue to launch air strikes from it.

Alan

No way! It's not worth the risk of putting US soldiers in harm's way for minimal gains. The Afghans that the US were supposedly training have no interest in fighting for Afghanistan. They only want to fight for their tribe/family/ethnic group when it becomes necessary.

So does this mean all the girls that were finally allowed to get an education will now have to turn their diplomas in to the Taliban?

20 year breather wrote:

MelRnr wrote:

What? You said the US has never won a ground war on foreign territory? How about these: Spanish American War (Cuba campaign on the ground), WWI, WWII, Persian Gulf War aka Desert Storm (of which I'm a veteran of) is one of the most decisive victories in modern history.

Also, the war for oil money argument can be made for Iraq (2003), but Afghanistan was definitely to root out al qaeda and the Taliban. In fact, criticism was made against the Bush admin that we went to Iraq "for oil" before "finishing the job" in Afghanistan. We definitely went into Afghanistan because of 9/11.

Could it be argued that the US occupation in Afghanistan at least kept the Taliban out of power for 20 years? That was surely something positive.

Yes. We were apparently the only thing keeping the Taliban out of power.

Imagine if you gave all of the liberal Americans tons of guns of military equipment and had them fight a bunch of NRA loving southerners who had their own guns.

How would that go?

Only a failure from the perspective of those who thought somehow this would ever turn out differently

Mr Gerlun wrote:

88 billons dollars spent in training , equipping and funding the Afghan army.

To lose and collapse against peasant with rifles. It's an epic failure.

* wrote:

Imagine if you gave all of the liberal Americans tons of guns of military equipment and had them fight a bunch of NRA loving southerners who had their own guns.

How would that go?

Amen brother.

* wrote:

Imagine if you gave all of the liberal Americans tons of guns of military equipment and had them fight a bunch of NRA loving southerners who had their own guns.

How would that go?

It's almost like we did that once.

Is that a bad thing? As much as I hate the Chinese government, if they eliminate a bunch of women beaters then more power to them.

Yawn^9 wrote:

Is that a bad thing? As much as I hate the Chinese government, if they eliminate a bunch of women beaters then more power to them.

That is what I’m thinking too, and I hope they go in soon no joke

The Taliban running the joint won't be easy. They have to contend with Iran, Uzbekistan, Turkey(?) and Tajikistan. For one, Pakistan will have to pour in cash to keep the Talis afloat. It could blow up in their face.

MelRnr wrote:

What? You said the US has never won a ground war on foreign territory? How about these: Spanish American War (Cuba campaign on the ground), WWI, WWII, Persian Gulf War aka Desert Storm (of which I'm a veteran of) is one of the most decisive victories in modern history.

Either lost or unfinished

MelRnr wrote:

Also, the war for oil money argument can be made for Iraq (2003), but Afghanistan was definitely to root out al qaeda and the Taliban. In fact, criticism was made against the Bush admin that we went to Iraq "for oil" before "finishing the job" in Afghanistan. We definitely went into Afghanistan because of 9/11.

9/11 was an excuse.

A bunch of Saudis hijacked planes and flew them into buildings and you needed to bomb the sh*t out of an entire country for 20 years because of that. Stop drinking the cordial your army fed yo.

Prior to 9/11 the Taliban was an ally of USA, and they were going to allow the pipeline from Turkmenistan through to Arabian Sea, but they fell out with each other. Figure it out for yourself

WoogieBunt wrote:

Liberals cheer the Taliban advance.

I know you're a basement dwelling incel/troll with a low IQ, but I'll play anyway.

No 'liberal' I know is cheering the Taliban advance. All the progressives I know are sick at heart at the thought of what is going to happen to the innocent women and girls (and men as well) who will be forced back into the virtual dark ages at the hands of these mentally malformed religious freaks. We are talking about smart, beautiful young women who have pursued education, relationships, been able to start professional careers, etc. Is there anything we can do about this now? Realistically, sadly, nothing. But if you aren't deeply saddened at the thought of what's going to happen to them you are missing your soul.

20 year breather wrote:

Could it be argued that the US occupation in Afghanistan at least kept the Taliban out of power for 20 years? That was surely something positive.

Grasping at straws in the extreme. Weeks into withdrawal and Afghanistan has reverted to how it was a day before invasion nearly 20 years ago.

The original rationale was to deny Al Qaeda a base but in doing this (combined with destabilization of Iraq), it created a ideological space for ISIL and other groups to form. The defeat of ISIL has strengthened al-Assad and fuelled the Syrian Civil War. The overspill of this has also encouraged Erdoğan to crackdown on Kurds in Turkey.

What was the point of it all? What was the money spent on? The needlessness of soldier's deaths and civilian deaths across the region? 'Regime change' interventions are messy and never ever have the desired outcome. This was a knee jerk, vengeful reaction which took place less than a month after 9/11.