Liz Cheney calls on Trump to reject peace deal offer in Afghanistan

[corbe]

Liz Cheney calls on Trump to reject peace deal offer in Afghanistan

by Susan Ferrechio

August 21, 2019 09:34 AM
 
Rep. Liz Cheney called on President Trump to reject a peace deal with the Taliban in Afghanistan, arguing in an op-ed that it would be tantamount to losing the war to al Qaeda, the Taliban and the Islamic State.

“We should not withdraw U.S. forces based on a political timetable that grants concessions to the Taliban and allows the terrorists to maintain safe havens from which they can plan and train for future attacks in the West,” the representative from Wyoming, and daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney, wrote in the Washington Post.

The Trump Administration is negotiating the withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan, where they have been fighting a war since 2001, when her father served with President George W. Bush and the two were responding to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that were orchestrated by Afghanistan-based al Qaeda.

<..snip..>

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/liz-cheney-calls-on-trump-to-reject-peace-deal-offer-in-afghanistan

[Sanguine]

And, staying there for 20 years and sending men and women over there to bleed for us is "winning the war"?

[txradioguy]

I've never understood why we're negotiating with the Taliban.  That's like Israel trying to negotiate for peace with the Muslim Brotherhood.

[txradioguy]

And, staying there for 20 years and sending men and women over there to bleed for us is "winning the war"?

We haven't really tried to win anything there.  If we would actually use the full force of our military...there wouldn't be a Taliban to negotiate with.

[Sanguine]

We haven't really tried to win anything there.  If we would actually use the full force of our military...there wouldn't be a Taliban to negotiate with.

I dunno, TRG.  I tend to fall back on Winston Churchill's opinion here:

“Financially it is ruinous. Morally it is wicked. Militarily it is an open question, and politically it is a blunder.”

[txradioguy]

I dunno, TRG.  I tend to fall back on Winston Churchill's opinion here:

That's how it plays out today.  But in all honestly...we haven't had the willpower to absolutely crush an enemy into surrender since WW II.

[Night Hides Not]

I dunno, TRG.  I tend to fall back on Winston Churchill's opinion here:

History is replete with examples of military failures in Afghanistan. If we couldn't defeat the Taliban in 20 years, I don't believe another 20 years will do the trick.

There are a lot of bad people in bad places throughout the world. Better to heed Churchill's words, and Washington's admonitions about foreign entanglements.

[Sanguine]

That's how it plays out today.  But in all honestly...we haven't had the willpower to absolutely crush an enemy into surrender since WW II.

I agree with that.  I just don't think Afghanistan is the place to try to change that run.

[txradioguy]

I agree with that.  I just don't think Afghanistan is the place to try to change that run.

We can't now if we wanted to.  We'd need a military the size of what we had during the 2007 surge.  And as long as the Libs throw every obstacle they can find in the way of rebuilding our military we'll never be back to a size to do what's necessary.

[Night Hides Not]

I agree with that.  I just don't think Afghanistan is the place to try to change that run.

We don't have the leadership in DC to see it through, nor is there the national will to support "total war" in Afghanistan.

We would also face the wrath of the international community, and likely a coalition of communist and Islamic nations rallying to support the Taliban, if only to embarrass the US.

How much more treasure do we have to sacrifice in the shithole known as Afghanistan?

[txradioguy]

We don't have the leadership in DC to see it through, nor is there the national will to support "total war" in Afghanistan.

We would also face the wrath of the international community, and likely a coalition of communist and Islamic nations rallying to support the Taliban, if only to embarrass the US.

How much more treasure do we have to sacrifice in the shithole known as Afghanistan?

The problem we face now in not having crushed the Taliban when we could have is that no matter what we're gonna have to deal with the Afghanistan issue at some point down the road.  If we're gone by next year it's gonna be our grandkids that are the ones going back in there to clean out the next Bin laden and whatever the Taliban looks like at that point.

We're screwed either way thanks to 8 years of Obama's "leadership".

[Night Hides Not]

We can't now if we wanted to.  We'd need a military the size of what we had during the 2007 surge.  And as long as the Libs throw every obstacle they can find in the way of rebuilding our military we'll never be back to a size to do what's necessary.

Peak level of Soviet forces in Afghanistan was nearly 110,000, ours reached 100,000 in 2010.

I can think of no argument the current Administration could offer in support of more troops in Afghanistan that would win the support of America today.

In my view, "doing what's necessary" would also result in tens of thousands of civilian casualties, i.e. collateral damage. The Taliban is not a conventional army, just as the Viet Cong were not a conventional army.

[Sanguine]

Peak level of Soviet forces in Afghanistan was nearly 110,000, ours reached 100,000 in 2010.

I can think of no argument the current Administration could offer in support of more troops in Afghanistan that would win the support of America today.

In my view, "doing what's necessary" would also result in tens of thousands of civilian casualties, i.e. collateral damage. The Taliban is not a conventional army, just as the Viet Cong were not a conventional army.

And, I'm convinced that Afghanistan is ungovernable.  Even if we accomplished a clear-cut military win, we would still be stuck with Afghanistan.

[Night Hides Not]

And, I'm convinced that Afghanistan is ungovernable.  Even if we accomplished a clear-cut military win, we would still be stuck with Afghanistan.

The entirety of world history agrees with you.

[txradioguy]

Peak level of Soviet forces in Afghanistan was nearly 110,000, ours reached 100,000 in 2010.

I can think of no argument the current Administration could offer in support of more troops in Afghanistan that would win the support of America today.

In my view, "doing what's necessary" would also result in tens of thousands of civilian casualties, i.e. collateral damage. The Taliban is not a conventional army, just as the Viet Cong were not a conventional army.

The one thing that we haven't done...that we SHOULD have done a long time ago...is go after them in their winter training camps.

And that's in the frontier region of Western Pakistan.

Every year we've allowed them to retreat up the Khyber Pass into Pakistan before the snows close off the roads to regroup...hang out with their families...recruit new fighters and rearm for the spring "fighting season".

We kick their ass 7 months out of the year only to stop let them retreat and re arm to do it all again.  And on top of it they receive material support from those sympathetic to their cause from inside the ISI.

If we'd have hit them just once during the time their in their winter encampment it would have dealt a serious blow to their morale and their ability to fight.

[truth_seeker]

I distinctly remember early 2002, articles about their caves, and our bombs that could blast the caves.

Then articles asking "why we stopped short of total victory?"

[Sanguine]

The one thing that we haven't done...that we SHOULD have done a long time ago...is go after them in their winter training camps.

And that's in the frontier region of Western Pakistan.

Every year we've allowed them to retreat up the Khyber Pass into Pakistan before the snows close off the roads to regroup...hang out with their families...recruit new fighters and rearm for the spring "fighting season".

We kick their ass 7 months out of the year only to stop let them retreat and re arm to do it all again.  And on top of it they receive material support from those sympathetic to their cause from inside the ISI.

If we'd have hit them just once during the time their in their winter encampment it would have dealt a serious blow to their morale and their ability to fight.

Serious question here - what do we do with them after we "win"?

[edpc]

The one thing that we haven't done...that we SHOULD have done a long time ago...is go after them in their winter training camps.

And that's in the frontier region of Western Pakistan.

So true. Pakistan is always been the problem, since the Taliban is a creation of theirs. It was a colossal mistake to trust them in the early days, during the siege at Tora Bora. Harboring bin Laden and putting A. Q. Khan under house arrest showed their true colors. If we could have just killed bin Laden, in the early days, we could have walked away and declared victory.

[txradioguy]

Serious question here - what do we do with them after we "win"?

The easy answer is give them their country back. 

But the easy answer isn't always the one that will work

I've talked to people there...seen photos from magazines and archives of what Afghanistan was like pre 1973 coup. 

They were western in their dress and daily life much the way that Iran was prior to the overthrow of the Shah in 1979.  Hell they had a National Theater company.  A national airline.

They had Boy Scout and Girl Scout organizations.  They had women attending college to learn to be Midwives.

The subsequent revolution in 1978 and the Soviets starting to interfere in 1979 made things worse...the Taliban taking over after the Russians left finished off that country as anything close to resembling a civilized nation.

What educated people (doctors lawyers teachers etc etc) the Taliban didn't publicly execute they drove off to other countries never to return.  Remember the pictures of shop keepers digging up their televisions and radios they'd been forced to hide because the Taliban forbid them?  The Taliban had the same chilling effect on education in the country as well.  Same for literature.

I say all that to get to this point...the people left there that are smart enough to run the country aren't enough to...IMHO...keep the country stable in the numbers they have.  It would take a LOT of people that fled...educated people...willing to return and build a country from scratch to make that place work without some kind of help from us.

[txradioguy]

So true. Pakistan is always been the problem, since the Taliban is a creation of theirs. It was a colossal mistake to trust them in the early days, during the siege at Tora Bora. Harboring bin Laden and putting A. Q. Khan under house arrest showed their true colors. If we could have just killed bin Laden, in the early days, we could have walked away and declared victory.

My dad was stationed in Pakistan in the early 60's when he was in the USAF..he said even back then where the Taliban have their winter camps set up was a no go area for the military.

We barely missed Bin Laden at Tora Bora.  We had him and because of some squeamishness by a couple of our NATO Allies involved in the fight and because the Afghan Army unilaterally declared a cease fire with the Taliban and drew their weapons on the 5th SFG when they tried to re-engage the Taliban...Bin Laden got away and it was another 10 years before we actually killed him.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

The problem we face now in not having crushed the Taliban when we could have is that no matter what we're gonna have to deal with the Afghanistan issue at some point down the road.  If we're gone by next year it's gonna be our grandkids that are the ones going back in there to clean out the next Bin laden and whatever the Taliban looks like at that point.

We're screwed either way thanks to 8 years of Obama's "leadership".

Going back in?  Nope.

We've given the good people of Afghanistan plenty of time to build up a moderate society that can protect itself.  If they LET the Taliban take control, AGAIN, next time we blow the hell out of their country remotely.  Collateral damage is their fault, not ours.

[berdie]

Serious question here - what do we do with them after we "win"?

My thought exactly. You really can't "mend" a tribal society. And sadly that doesn't just apply to Afghanistan in the ME.

Get our guys and girls out of there.

[Night Hides Not]

Serious question here - what do we do with them after we "win"?

Serious answer: the male population likely has an education level equal to that of the worst ghettoes in the US, and the female population is illiterate. There's really no quick fixes there, you're talking decades of building a civilization from the ground up.

That's all they know. In a less than serious vein, I thought we should send Afghani children to Disney World for two weeks, to give them a chance to see what is beyond their borders. Instead of changing their minds, some radical kid would probably set off his suicide vest while meeting Mickey Mouse.

[Fishrrman]

txradio observes:
"But in all honestly...we haven't had the willpower to absolutely crush an enemy into surrender since WW II."

Let me ask you a trick question.
Who IS "the enemy" in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, etc. ...?

Bonus question (if you answered the first one correctly):
How would you vanquish that enemy?

[Sanguine]

Serious answer: the male population likely has an education level equal to that of the worst ghettoes in the US, and the female population is illiterate. There's really no quick fixes there, you're talking decades of building a civilization from the ground up.

That's all they know. In a less than serious vein, I thought we should send Afghani children to Disney World for two weeks, to give them a chance to see what is beyond their borders. Instead of changing their minds, some radical kid would probably set off his suicide vest while meeting Mickey Mouse.

Other than maybe being a little optimistic about the education level of Afghan men, I think you're correct.